I propose we go back to this model until Red Sector is alit with meaningful discourse, violence, and purpose.
I have more feelings on this but don't know how to put them into words yet.
The definition of conflict is very broad, and not at all centric around the idea of violence. There are a great many conflicts occuring throughout the game, with violence and PVP action being the most visible form. Influence-peddling, subtle manipulation, data-brokering, deceit & fraud, political maneuvering; these are all aspects of conflict an average Corpo-Cit can become embroiled in. Either driving, or becoming the victim.
I disagree with this idea of getting rid of Topside PCs. Disagree greatly. PCs have many reasons for coming topside, and shouldn't be expected to conform to one someone or other defines as 'conflict'. Some people prefer the subtle Corporate Machinations to bludgeoning or being bludgeoned. Let people play how they want.
More snooty corpie scumbags for us to hunt and hate please!
On that note, a big thanks to all of you playing corpies and playing them well. A truly well played corpie has a HUGE potential to galvanize Mixers and foster fun plots.
The concept of being unable to do something in Red Sector which a player is doing topside is a fallacy.
I know my view is an extreme one but I will stress I think themely roles uniquely supported by corporate play, like writers, journalists, scientists, artists, technologists, deckers, and others, are necessarily things that would have to be equally (or better) supported in this merged vision of the future. The main purpose would not be to cast these roles out, but to put everyone in the same playing area to tell stories together.
Thirdly, Corporate Players are not insulated. There are countless public areas where violence can and does happen topside - almost on a daily basis. The general understanding among most players is that no sector other than Blue is entirely safe. The illusion of safety is fleeting. If, however, one particular character is hard to reach due to their own cleverness, for example, that's merely good planning on their part.
We've seen numerous examples where even the wealthiest & most powerful Corpo-Cits can become victims of conflict in numerous forms.
Going to repeat a saying I previously used in regards to overly hush-hush conflict: If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
I'm not saying there aren't wheels in motion topside but, it's often at such a slow and quiet rate that ultimately nobody else in the game populace will know, care, react to or talk about it. That's RP that doesn't get to happen. I'm not sure exactly where the line should sit between realistic discretion regarding one's plots and actions, and being so obvious about it everyone knows what you're up to, but there is a balance here to be considered.
From someone who regularly takes part and creates this topside drama that "doesn't happen", I would respectfully disagree with this idea. More snooty corpie scumbags for us to hunt and hate please!
Corpies really do be needing to be louder, more eccentric, more everything. Earn that hatred if you play a corpcit, draw attention to yourself, open up to getting slapped for it. Too many of them are meek and quiet and know they can hide away as long as they want because topside is way too safe.
I don't think intrigue and corporate gameplays topside are mutually exclusive. I simply think topside has provided too powerful of a way to insulate corporate citizens from the rest of the game with no consequences of meaning while they stack paychecks.
Honestly yeah, this. This 100%.
I lack the words to explain how exhausted I am of being a force of conflict in this game for a very, very, very long time.
For my entire playing career every year the staff have run Mix-versus-Topside plots to drive connections and development between the two but these are infamously low engagement efforts.
I don't see how the game expects to support such two huge massive game areas with players who don't have to interact unless they want to, while the population will slowly tick down over time. It's just flat out too physically big to fill.
Put another way: If topside didn't exist, and we had about 30-50 active players at any given time, how do y'all think players would receive the announcement that 1000+ rooms and 100+ jobs and ten factions and three new zones were going to be added to the game in a separate corporate world?
As a Corporate Citizen, you are the most tangible representation of corporate sovereignty and oppression sans the WJF. It is literally your duty to play to theme and invoke that expectation in some form or another.
This argument has always been funny to me because while yes sure that might be true, the mixer often needs to do risky things for that hustle and is infinitely more likely to LOSE THEIR INVESTMENTS. That matters too. If you accumulate chyen somewhat slower but never die, never lose your shit, are you really poorer? No.
We've seen numerous examples where even the wealthiest & most powerful Corpo-Cits can become victims of conflict in numerous forms.
Few and far between, often accomplished with great force and/or by staying up all night for those few times in a 24hr period your corpo target is outside and exposed. It happens sure, but not nearly enough. And that is the issue.
If someone doesn't know about it except for the people involved in it, I'd say that's just good OPSEC on the part of the players involved. Secrets are, after all, worth more than all the chy in the world. Some plots absolutely do become public knowledge eventually, even if there's nothing anyone can do about it after the fact. Not everyone deserves to be involved in everyone else's plots.
Again, Corporate Players are not 'stacking paychecks'. Mixers are limited only by their own imagination as-to how, when, and off-of-whom they make their chy. Corpo-Cits are somewhat more limited, which means risk-taking by selling data, stealing secrets, or conducting business with certain unscrupulous individuals opens up aspects of RP most mixers never see. There are aspects of play only a Corpo-Cit can experience. That 'Boardroom Roleplay' for some is fun and an entirely different level of conflict.
Yes this would be why I clarified that I don't know where the line is, being someone who respects and enjoys good opsec themselves, while also pointing out however that the rate of topside 'conflict' currently is so slow, so hush-hush or uninteresting, that for all intents and purposes appears to be stagnating.
I believe the game will have to at some point in the next ten years, maybe much sooner rather than later, have to decide which parts of itself it wants to preserve and support with the resources it has left. It grew to staggering physical and conceptual size at its height but I don't see those resources and support and players returning. We can't, in my opinion, spread 20 peak players across this world and except a lot of interplay and activity. It doesn't have to be now but this discussion is worth having because now is going to come quicker than we may think.
It would be my preference to preserve the punk and not the privilege. We can support the same roles and the same gameplay, in my opinion, in a different context but we need to be thinking about squishing players physically together in the game world.
But.. yeah, too many corpies are friendly and neutral. Need more snooty class dividers.
Yes. As a corpcit you are literally playing an antagonist, You may just be a "Wage slave" but your character has chosen to follow their dreams and accept that selling their soul to a corporation that does shit that goes AGAINST what is good for the dome in favor of profit. You could be playing a character who yes is just a wage slave and it's just a job. But then you're in the realm of "is that story even worth telling." Because at that point it's just a reflection of reality.
With this are you saying that if you aren't an antagonist in some way, you're not playing to theme?
I appreciate and enjoy good OPSEC, as well. Taking a chance on whether someone is trustworthy or not and finding out that Yes, they might actually be trustworthy, is a good feeling. There's always the threat that a secret might get out, sure - betrayal happens at all levels of the game. It just makes one cautious to avoid making the same mistakes.
Personally, I do not see conflict stagnating topside. I think that it's growing, in fact. I can;t say much more than that due to OOC rules, but Characters, like people, do change. Ambitions grow. Plans develop.
How players wants to play can be supported in many different ways but the game space we occupy has become a serious problem in my view. Already I would consider the majority of the game to be on SIC and what happens in the game world a smaller minority. Too many players are too physically separated and linked only by comms.
That may indeed be the case, and if things are gaining momentum then I'm glad to hear it! For the sake of the topic, though, I wanted to voice my general thoughts about topside play and how it's appeared and felt since I started playing.
Just a quick comment that yeah I do agree the division of a small playerbase probably does more harm than good, I've said before I wish there were incentive for corpies to slum it in the mix or otherwise force more cooperation/conflict between the two sectors but with things as they are right now, culturally and the physical division, it's tough.
I'm not personally saying I want to throw out the gameplay players can uniquely get topside because as much as I personally think there's some unthematic gameplay topside, we support tech archetypes, journalists, artists, scientists, and other roles topside and don't with the Mix. Those (and others) are all valuable, thematic, things to retain.
That isn't necessarily a problem, but it's just how people choose to engage. Some may be work-idle, others may prefer a more passive role in the game, and for some, maybe it's situational. The root issue, then, isn't where people are, but how they're choosing to participate.
Bringing the small subset of corporate players into the Mix - roughly 10, give or take, that are active at a glance (don't quote me on this) - doesn't inherently fix the issue, imho. What does the Mix stand to gain from this change beyond having a few more potential targets? How will this genuinely change how you guys go about your roleplay right now if we fired everyone and put them back in the Mix?
Conflict and engagement need to be driven by active characters, not just by rearranging where they exist on a map. If the concern is a lack of meaningful, high-stakes conflict, then the focus should be on incentives, stakes, and encouraging more visible, consequence-driven play regardless of sector.
[This is my opinion and not reflective of the staff opinion as a whole.]
Yes
With this are you saying that if you aren't an antagonist in some way, you're not playing to theme?
Yes
As it stands right now, there are two Mega-Corporations who's entire lore-based background is built off of a massive foundation of Mixer Labor. Those being PRI & NLM. At least with PRI, it'd be very difficult to play a Corpo who's Anti-Mixer when 60%+ of their staff are Service-Mixers employed by the Corporation in Logistics roles. Not only would that drive away Mixer players, but I have a feeling such a Corpo-Cit employed by that Corporation would be told by their respective supervisor to 'get it together' and remember who helps keep the city running. I.e., Service-staff making sure the city gets its supply of food, water, over-priced goods, and mass-produced tech.
Someone can be 'friendly' with Mixers while still being focused on their own selfish needs. Promotion, connections, developing resources to gain more power, etc. Not every Corpo-Cit needs to hate on the filthy masses. Mixers are Pawns to be used to further one's goals, but how one does that isn't up to anyone except the player. I'd say that's very themely.
I can't tell you how many times I've checked the where list to get a sense of the player spread, only to find there's no clear place to drop an NPC to seed roleplay or introduce plot hooks. If engagement is already this fragmented in the Mix with a majority of the playerbase present, what tangible benefit does merging corporate players into this space actually provide that'll genuinely solve the existing problems?
Nobody is stating that anyone is 'unable to do it'. Furthermore, if someone believes Corpo-Cits are 'stacking paychecks', then I question their familiarity with Corporate play. Mixers, by and large, and capable of making much more money at a much faster rate than Corporate Citizens.This argument has always been funny to me because while yes sure that might be true, the mixer often needs to do risky things for that hustle and is infinitely more likely to LOSE THEIR INVESTMENTS. That matters too. If you accumulate chyen somewhat slower but never die, never lose your shit, are you really poorer? No.
This falls under them being likely to lose their investments, but it bears explicitly mentioning… Mixers invest their chyen in drastically different ways.
A corporate citizen may save up chyen for, and feel themselves obligated to buy an expensive new car, clothing, etc. Things that have value or meaning for themselves or in theory, but are unlikely to drive people to want to take those things from them.
Mixers will likely spend all of their chyen on cybernetics, armor, weapons, drugs, and utility objects they need to navigate the Mix. When was the last time a corporate player needed a flashlight? A hook? Vehicle armor? The things Mixers purchase are, by far and large, cumulatively more expensive an investment relative to the expectation. That solo that just passed you by in full Xo5 with a 45 caliber gun on their hip while you're sitting in your Holden on Soma? Who do you think spent more? Who is more likely to lose it?
I understand the thematic influence and why it would have seemed like a cool idea to implement because a big part of Johnny's interest at the time (at least from hearing him talk about it) was modelling the 3D space for things like flight, but damn if it didn't have major long term negative repercussions on how players interact.
Maybe there's no un-ringing that bell now structurally but the degree the game has leaned into the stratification rather than away from it has, in my opinion, been negative overall.
To Macabre's point, I will walk through the city a few times a day (for REASONS) on Gold and Red both usually, and passing another player bit is a novelty even now. Does squishing everyone into one sector solve this in a stroke? No. As Macabre says even in the Mix players are very spread out and isolated, but in general I think it's good to start thinking about ways of collapsing players into shared spaces through a multitude of approaches, because if players are not in the same physical rooms the game will shift more and more onto SIC and less and less in the world and the last plots the game has could be entirely run through comms. Maybe that is inevitable anyway, but I do think we should at a minimum think about making the experience condensed and not larger in general.
Now imagine that +85 years in the future, in the literal cyberpunk dystopian future, where corporations own everything, in a perpetual employer's market, in the bleakest conditions for "worker rights", and you have +50 million people forming lines, waiting, waiting to take your job.
And despite all of that, you decide to spend your days socializing, doing the bare minimum, and collecting paychecks.
Until this culture isn't fixed and corporates do not feel the constant fire under their asses, they have no incentives to do shit.
Result? Rich mixers, poor wageslaves.
I really should make a thread about this.
Corporate PCs can reimburse a lot of costs if it's pertinent to their work, and as mentioned a few times above they also risk loss significantly less which offsets that.
Ever. What you might see is players literally quitting because they don't want that kind of playstyle.
Go and slap a baka, spew shit on the network.
There are thousands of ways to start a conflict, forcing one through coded means and for the heck of it because there is a lack of it will just literally have players annoyed.
My opinion of course.
Conflict oriented players will find conflict anywhere.
This is simply how it is. If someone wants to engage in PvP, conflict, fucking with others, it really doesn't matter whether you're a mixer, a service mixer, a regular wageslave or some exec. It doesn't matter if you're just an immy or max UE. A player who wants to engage in that will find ways to do it, and a player that doesn't will always find some kind of excuse not to when the time comes.
I don't think shifting topside PCs into the Mix will help with conflict purely because of this. You can suddenly have all the max UE combat PCs with a bunch of gear on them drop to the Mix and while it might in a way make them more accessible, that's not going to change player attitude much when it comes to going outside or on the other hand players plotting to take that from them. Being max UE, having gear, these don't make a conflict oriented player, the mentality does.
I've never understood the idea behind forcing players into that spot and expecting them to play to it. It simply won't happen and that's okay, people have different RP preferences. It's another discussion entirely whether that's themely or good for the game, but I've seen the results firsthand of what happens when you put players in situations or roles that have to do with pushing conflict and yet the player doesn't want to engage in it. I think it ends up being worse for the game.
I find it hard to believe that increasing the total amount of players in a given space would have no effect on interplay and activity especially because the highest levels of activity and conflict topside happened when the population there was the highest (early or late 2020 I think?), which coincided with the lower levels of activity in the Mix when the population was lowest.
I think we can enable lots of different playtypes and preferences and roleplaying styles without strictly allowing for players to live on separate picket-fencing suburban housing in a different sector, personally. I don't see those cosmetic trappings as necessary parts of their gameplay, myself.
If we had an abundance of staff members and one of them found a way to codedly revamp space to have it connect it to the rest of the playerbase in a way that'd justify it being more than a one-off thing, I'm sure it would be considered.
This is a huge game we're trying to support with 3-6 GMs and maybe ~100 total active players. How much of that total effort can we really say is spent on the theme the game was conceived as having? Because from my perspective I would say only a minority of the game's net activitity is really anything resembling cyberpunk and yet it keeps getting more and more spread out and more and more everything to everyone.
If we're as a whole a majority in favour of just letting it be what it's going to be and coming (very eventually) to a point where the game has 1 senior corporate character living on Blue, 2 juniors living on Green, and 4 Mixers living on Red and trying to figure out stories to tell between them then I'll accept that, but my feeling is that a certain amount of critical mass of storytelling and visible interaction between players in the same physical spaces has to be maintained or the game will be perceived as being dead and players will stop engaging with it.
That's the core factor: engaged players create activity, not just population density.
But if simply increasing the number of players was enough to generate meaningful interplay, then we wouldn't see the current realityo f high player counts with walking around the mix feeling empty. Players tend to gravitate toward spaces where others are actively making things happen, whether that's topside, the mix, or anywhere else.
Well, by the same token, the Mix is also too big (in my opinion). Like if topside was eliminated as a living and playing space tomorrow the game would still be (in my opinion) three times too large for the number of active players it has. There's too many different places to be and the level of casual (or causal) interaction is, if not too low, then declining. These are feedback loops in my opinion because the perception that there will be no one to interact with drives a disinterest in making efforts to go about and interact.
A small net increase in the amount of contact between player bits wouldn't change everything overnight but it would change a negative feedback loop to a positive feedback loop. Activity drives interest which drives activity which drives interest which drives recruitment and population which drives activity. This loop can work in both directions and in my opinion there's only so much any individual player or staffer can do themselves to get out and make things happen to effect a change in the net direction.
(Edited by Macabre at 4:37 pm on 3/6/2025)
It sounds like a pain that you're all stretched so thin though, but good for us to consider.
(This is meant to be a bit inflammatory. I feel like, as a Mixer, my character is RPing with the same 3-5 characters day in and day out. This is despite being on and offline over a 12-18 hour time window any given day of the week. It's wack. The RP is great. But, it is extremely siloed.)
As @Macabre stated, staff is stretched THIN.
IMO (OPINION)
My OPINION that 90% of topside "conflict" should have a Mix component. Like I think Reefer or Nymphali said, if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is around to hear it…
"Nobody" in the game cares if one corpie spent three months getting another corpie into a compromising position to take a picture of them with their weenie in someone else they shouldn't have had their weenie in. Or whatever counts as "conflict" top side. Nobody cares if one corpie gets another corpie fired.
Nobody cares if half a dozen corpies are being snide and playing high school level social head games of who does or doesn't talk to who. Or go to whoever's event. Or whatever. Or doing character assassination based on their poor impulse control, cringe kinks, etc. Go play the Sims.
I would beseech all corporate players to take ten minutes and write down how the last six months of your character's lives have impacted the Mix. If you can't spend ten minutes doing that, and you run out of material before that, I'm going to suggest that you aren't doing enough to keep conflict alive in a broad sense.
I can count on ONE finger, the number of corporate characters who are antagonistically active on SIC on any given day. Anyone who plays regularly knows exactly who that character is. And kudos to you for being you.
The rest of you? Or at least your characters... *yawn*
To get back on my McGuffin soap box, the "solution" to this is easy.
Re-introduce MCGs. Make interaction with them mandatory. Make the scan points for them 80% locations in the Mix. Instead of 95% on Gold.
Punish (demote, garnish wages, etc.) characters who go more than (2 weeks, 4 weeks, whatever) without codedly interacting with a MCG.
Punish (demote, garnish wages, etc.) characters who horde the MCGs and do them in isolation. Or with the same 1-2 other characters every week.
Give a pass on MCGs to the couple of NLM characters who spend time creating content.
At the same time, maybe make them actually CREATE content in the Mix. Or out in the Badlands. Instead of in imaginary, far away, uncoded locations. Make them put together a space crew to film a space drama. Make them camp out in the Badlands for two weeks to film some Mad Max-esque drama. Even something as simple as taking an eyePod and getting actual footage of the sets. Instead of just creating them out of whole cloth.
To wrap this up, I will echo what others have alluded to.
There STRONGLY SEEMS TO BE, two completely different groups of people "playing" Sindome.
One group is actively engaging with each other in violent, combat type conflict. Conflict that also has betrayal. Selling each other out. All of that. Conflict where gear and chy are lost in major ways.
The other is sitting around playing (insert Netflix drama series), but cyber noir style. Where no gear is being lost. No physical, or other real PVP, skill against skill conflict is taking place. And, they could literally be doing that kind of RP on any other M* environment on the entire internet.
To sum up. Come on down to the Mix. The water's FINE.
Make Corporate Security take trips into the mix. Not just to catch mixer A who said mean things. Maybe have them go in disguise to have face time with a contact. Set up a site where a Gitmo style interrogation with plausible deniability. Eliminate HR. Eliminate PR. Eliminate Requisitions. Let Juniors live in the mix. Don't penalize corporates for going to the mix. Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
However, I do want to say something to any and all posters in this thread who aim the platitudes of 'do more conflict yourself' or 'be the change' at ReeferMadness. I would say from my educated opinion on the matter, ReeferMadness is the most conflict oriented player in the game and has done more for active conflict plotting in one character than most players will typically do in their entire time playing Sindome.
These requests and topics, specifically those concerning ways to spur conflict, are usually coming from players who are already doing their best to try and create more conflict. The cookie cutter responses to reflect the issue and burden back at whoever proposes ideas, issues, or changes are not cool.
I love reading anecdotes like that.
Without going into specifics, assuming that character is still active and therefore not eligible to speak about as a "war story", what made it so impactful?
How many other characters in the 7 years since that interaction have come close to that level of impact?
My sense is that exceptional people are rare. That's why they stand out as being exceptional. For everyone one person who is expanding the definition of what is possible, there are countless others who aren't. And won't.
I encourage everyone, myself included, do not make this discussion about people. It's not about individuals. It is not about one specific character. Or one group of players.
The takeaway I had from the original poster. In my own take on this subject, is that it is about the system. It is about the processes. It is about the game Dynamics involved.
And I have not seen any significant, concrete rebuttal the premise that there are effectively two different groups of people playing this game. And in addition to that, there are not any meaningful systems in place to force regular interaction between those two groups.
Because of these realities, the mix and the corporate world can essentially continue to exist as separate entities.
Corporates can pretend the Mix doesn't exist.
For the most part, unless a Mixer directly insults a corporate on SIC, the Mix can pretend corporate characters don't exist.
I'd love to see some anonymized analytics showing
How many times in a 7 or 30 day period any given corporate character is in the same room as a Mixer.
How many times they SIC or Progia call a Mixer.
Or even 2 degrees of separation for the above. How often does a corpie get into the same room with another corpie who has contacted a Mixer. (Excluding for ERP)
If we had the same roles and jobs and gameplay and roleplay but in a single shared playing area would that itself mean they were no longer enabled to play?
To get back on my McGuffin soap box, the "solution" to this is easy.
Re-introduce MCGs. Make interaction with them mandatory. Make the scan points for them 80% locations in the Mix. Instead of 95% on Gold.
Punish (demote, garnish wages, etc.) characters who go more than (2 weeks, 4 weeks, whatever) without codedly interacting with a MCG.
Punish (demote, garnish wages, etc.) characters who horde the MCGs and do them in isolation. Or with the same 1-2 other characters every week.
Give a pass on MCGs to the couple of NLM characters who spend time creating content.
"
@Hek
I find this entire aspect of your post OOC demeaning, passive-aggressive, outright alienating, and frankly this is what disturbs me about some of the writers on this site. This attitude, the 'play how I want you to or else you should be punished' attitude that wants to railroad people into playing how 'you think' they should play the game, is frankly pretty unfun and down right disturbing. I can safely say, No. No thank you.
I'll play the game my way, and if you don't like it, then we can't write together.
A lot of the "anti-topside" opinions really just seem to boil down to "you do not conflict how I want to conflict so your gameplay should be invalidated, and you forced into my sandbox" and… that's just horrible. Besides that, it won't work, if you push someone into RP they don't enjoy, they will quit, or flat out not engage.
Similarly just because a corpie does not spent half a day bemoaning mixers on pubsic, that does not mean they are not active in the mix either, but due to their nature they tend to do so indirectly. Sometimes that may just mean floating a lot of chy down or slipping the right piece of data to fuel some conflict. None of this wider game population will see.
As I always say, be the change you want to be. If you think that super openly mixer-shitting on and refusing to cooperate corpie would be good for the game and fun to play - play one.
If we had the same roles and jobs and gameplay and roleplay but in a single shared playing area would that itself mean they were no longer enabled to play?"
Privilege & Excess, imo, define Corporate lifestyle. You have to work to keep it, but having better food, better water, better air, cleaner streets, and the illusion of safety set up the narrative that the 'Upper Class' has it easier - even if, in reality, Corporate Citizens are just as trapped as the Mixers. I think losing the separation and allowing the two to intermingle would affect the dynamic in a way that's hard to quantify.
The whole "topside feels disconnected" thing isn't new. It comes up every so often, and there's a reason for that. It's not that corporate play doesn't matter, but a lot of the conflict happening up there may not always be felt outside that bubble. If people are saying it doesn't have much impact on the Mix, that's probably something worth looking at.
That being said, trying to force people into a certain style of RP or punish them for not playing the "right" way is just not it. People play the game in different ways, and if others try to push them into something they don't enjoy, they're either gonna ignore it or quit. Neither of those things actually help us to move forward with having a real conversation about problems like this.
As someone who's played a media star for a few years in the past, I've done just about everything under the sun to cross the corporate divide and make Mixer characters care about me while accepting the consequences that came my way for it:
I've gone slumming and forced other corporate characters to do so with me, which resulted in my character being heavily punished by the corporation when they found out for endangering another corporate asset for the hell of doing it.
I've been a public menace and thrown things off skywalks, rooftops, wherever you can name it and gotten threatened, coerced, and fined ridiculously for littering, almost killing a Judge, and all kinds of things.
I've caused riots by simply deciding I wanted to do something and did it and players did it with me.
I've gotten Mixers to come after my character because I wouldn't stop talking shit on pubSIC and being a loud and proud glittery corpie.
I've gone out of my way to roleplay in bars and public places to lure in newbies with the promise of money and make them do embarrassing things while all my corpie friends laughed at them on TV.
I did drugs in public places around high traffic paths and tried to invite people to do them with me and trade RP hooks to help them with something they wanted just for the interesting RP.
I've thrown parties and provided an easy target for people to make an example out of my PC many times over the years. People will either hate that PC, love that PC, or be ambivalent toward the dumb shit they did, but I tried to do things that affected everyone.
I don't know if someone's insane enough to do what I did, but the sky's the limit in terms of what a corporate character can do that isn't just sitting in their cubes, apartments, or wherever just idling and being bored. This isn't a criticism for other players who are content with what they're doing, but the very least we can all do is to try.
P.S. If this gets deleted, oh well. I deserve that too.
Like for example, let's say if we could just magic the world space into existence, would corporate jobs with corporate players in the "Mix" (though we might just call it the city if that's all it was) but with the most privileged of them having more secure living spaces (eg. in the same mechanical style as Xpress Heights/Praetorian), could that preserve the essentials of the corporate experience or do you think players just have to be separated and elevated?
Because at least to me, having special security and visible privileges in the same playing area almost cleaves closer to theme in practice because the disparity is right in people's faces.
More like corporate play in its current incarnation feels like a means to escape the PvP and conflict-oriented aspects of Sindome entirely in favor of near complete separation so they can enjoy their slice of slice RP in peace, while being incredibly difficult to ever even bring conflict TO. If you are not antagonizing mixers at least a little, if you are not using your (in some cases VAST AMOUNTS OF) accumulated wealth to create conflict and drive plot, if you can't even so much as muster a half-decent response to supposed lesser people antagonizing YOU, then you're kind of going against how conflict in the game was intended- not against how individual players with a chip on their shoulder want you to.
Literally if just a couple more corporate PCs could amp up the dramatics and do even half those things the game would be a much livelier place. Nobody wants to be the trouble-causer up there, no one wants to step a toe out of line, and it's rightfully created a perception that topside is dull.
as for ox1mm, omgawsh stop boo. first the language flirts, now the praise! But on a more serious note, I'd like to think that maybe I would still thrive in the Mix if we nuked the corpies out of the dome and just played back in the Mix like it used to be when ReeferMadness was young and spry. He tells us all about how the stories were cool and metal as fuck with mega interesting plotlines, but I think he's just bullshitting us.
Okay, no, honestly I do think that most corporate characters could thrive in the mix. The only immediate concerns I think players would have is whether the Mix could ever shift to a place where it can accommodate both nuanced, deep plots AND the fast, action-paced murder brawls on Fuller Street without alienating the different playstyles. It seems like it would be difficult to have both, so more experienced players step out of the "Mix 'n grime, tolls ain't paid, blood in the mist where the chy gets made" vibes and graduate toward more plot heavy, slower-paced interactions you can get topside because it fulfills where they're at in their cycle of Sindomian life. And when that gets boring, they fall or reroll and life begins anew.
I forgot where I was going with this. It's time for me to go to bed.
A.) No one engages with you whatsoever despite your best efforts to be interesting.
B.) You get dogpiled on publicly on SIC, but your homies stay quiet like Smokey when Debo comes around the block, waiting until he's gone to be in your SIC chip offering quiet support. Where were you when I needed you to uplift me PUBLICLY?
C.) People are passively reactionary and unable or unwilling to take the opportunity you present them to turn it into something like an advantage for themselves or more interesting RP. That actually hurt me the most quite and why I have trust issues.
1. I played a few mix characters before I ever touched a corporate character. One was a max UE combat character that robbed, murdered, betrayed, and did dumb violence all the time. So equating players with characters is a no-no that needs to be pointed out. Personally, I liked the change of pace and the slow-burn of a corporate pc. Building story, contacts, finding out how to navigate the shady within the public eye and corporate scrutiny to create a long-lasting influential PC. If you want to burn bright topside and burn out fast that's ok, too. Which leads to my first roleplay question is - does every character have to be exceptional all the time or the player is considered as engaging in bad roleplay? Is it bad roleplay to build a character slowly to the goal where, hopefully, exceptional roleplay and spread of rp opportunities is the norm?
2.Media Stars are kind of expected to flirt on the edge of acceptable social norms. Other roles get fired for just stepping foot in the mix. Not to mention, if a topside character is seen in the Mix they are just killed. Is it bad RP to pick and choose risks that might be beneficial for your character over those that aren't to risk everything over (thinking theme here) for the sake of bringing RP to the Mix, however limited? The way i see it, current rp standards in the mix are what stand in the way of more corporate-mixer interaction, not the other way around.
3. I've always found public sic to be attention-seeking and lazy RP to be honest. In the past, most of my interactions on public sic never saw any real RP come from it unless I delivered it. I'm sure this isn't always the case, but I would never applaud public sic as actual roleplay. I've always seen public sic as a tool, just like art, the grid, events, music, dancers, tailoring, tv, etc. None of those things are the RP that matters. It just facilitates more substantial stories and meaningful RP through the players and characters that engage with them. I feel like today's public sic is just used so people have a way to be public about all the RP they're 'doing'. I'm willing to see the other side, though, so, my question is: Is engaging in public sic a requirement for good roleplay now? And how does that fit into a corporate citizen's profile who probably doesn't really care what the typical person out of 100 million says on it whether they're mixer or corporate? A follow-up quesiton - does all good rp equal being public rp? Can we have rp that doesn't have big impacts on everyone that is still considered impactful and good roleplay? If not - what does this look like?
4.I agree with the sentiment and wish that there were more ways topside and mix characters could be enmeshed. Some roles have easier access to this dynamic than others, topside, as well. Assuming, and assumptions are usually wrong, that corporate characters don't spend more time with mixers than has been said here, what roleplay interactions are more meaningful? How can we do more of these?
5. I'm not an eight-hour-plus-a-day player. Maybe I'm missing something. I see violence all over all the time even if my character isn't directly swept up in it. The mudstats had this year as having more violence than ever before…or at least last year. I guess what I'm asking is I keep hearing there isn't enough conflict, violence, chaos, but at what level are we happy? What's the goal? I'll try to up my ante into the pot, but it seems like a knee-jerk reaction to almost everything now. The question: If we are plotting for conflict, but aren't actively contributing to violence, chaos, or conflict daily is this bad roleplay?
I believe part of the requirement of having corporate characters with wealth and affluence and privilege is that they also be subject to the conflict landscape on the same fair terms as everyone else to fuel the plotting and chyen economy.
A majority of cyberpunk media focuses on a thematic core of "high tech, low life" which is indeed core to cyberpunk. However, it is in contrast to megacorporations and the opulent lifestyles of those corporation's employees that the "low life" part really shines. A lot of the popular cyberpunk media that is consumed is from the perspective of those at the bottom and I think focuses on the thematic elements that fit into the "high tech low life" motif while much less cyberpunk media tells stories eyes of corporate drones. Regardless, themes such as social stratification and authoritarian corporatocracy are core themes to the genre. Overall, I feel as though some of the sentiment that have expressed views that cyberpunk only takes place in the slums, and that all RP should ultimate focus on supporting those playing out the traditional "low life, high tech" playstyle.
To me, one of the original attractions to Sindome was that the world feels like a fleshed out living world. It's amazing to me that within one game world, so many different playstyles and perspectives on what it means to inhibit a cyberpunk world can coexist. Regardless of what sector my characters have existed within, I have always felt like the world is larger than the world my character is inhabiting. To me it was enthralling to find a game world where people from all quadrants of Bartle taxonomy of player types can exist together.
I feel as though a large part of this thread is not quite about the game world of Sindome itself (such as moving topside living into the Mix, and other clearly stated mechanical/layout changes) but a wider conversation about how people play Sindome and how Sindome should be played. To use Bartle's taxonomy again, I think that some players whose primary playstyle are in the top-left quadrant need other people also in that quadrant to maximize fun and perhaps this thread is indicative of the fact that not enough players fill the space right now. However, I don't think that the solution would ever be to take players who enjoy existing within the other quadrants and pushing them into another.
Perhaps I am in the minority here, but I am 2/3rds a slice of life roleplayer in SD (but not always in other MUDs/MOOs) and I always have been. To me it is amazing to be able to say, 'Alright, what will life look like for this person who isn't a solo, isn't a ganger, isn't tough, and is just trying to eek out their life alongside the mess that we consider a classic cyberpunk dystopia.' While this doesn't afford me as many direct opportunities to drive roleplay as someone who wields power through force, there still are opportunities, and I try to take them when they present themselves. However, this thread has given me the sense that whether its in the Mix or topside, my style of RP just isn't welcome by some members of this community.
To voice this concern in an intentionally inflammatory and reductionist manner: I feel like some people posting here want Sindome to feel less like it currently does and more like an RPI cyberpunk Grand Theft Auto Online and those of us who want something different are simply wrong and how dare us not support your playstyle and your wants and your needs.
I very much think that people should reflect on theme, different types of playstyles, collaborative storytelling and ask themselves are they trying to contribute to a living world or do you simply want to strong-arm other players into a playstyle that better supports your own goals and sources of enjoyment?
From my perspective, conflict in the game right now does comes from topside. The Mix seems to currently be very clique driven with each clique avoiding conflict within itself and when conflict does arise between members of those cliques do the streets of the Mix run red with blood? No. The characters involved play hide and go seek while posturing and complaining about it on SIC. Where has large scale conflict come from in the past year? A back and forth of action and retaliation between top-side and the Mix. Sometimes it's visible, sometimes its not, but it's sure happening. As Napoleon has pointed out, sometimes people are given a plot hook that they outright ignore or discard. Sometimes something happens that someone *could* retaliate for and nothing ever happens.
Speaking of the "chyen economy", when I have played corporate characters, they have funneled, or been involved in funneling, hundred of thousands of credits down to Mix PCs. Is that not a form of creating RP? What happens to those credits when they reach the Mix? I have no clue, really. If those credits aren't being used to drive Mix conflict is the problem really with topside PCs or somewhere else?
If there's not enough topside conflict, then bring *more* players topside. It's been said in this thread before, be the change you want to see. So do it. Take a lev up to Gold or reroll a new character, corporate immigration is just one @service-request away. Simply based on numbers. If 10% of players create 90% of the momentum in the game, then of course topside is going to seem like a leech because 10% of 10% is a very small number. As has also been pointed out in this thread, it's not like a majority of Mix PCs are out and about and engaging in conflict all the time.
One thing that I've sorta seen mentioned here that I agree with is that I do think a more dangerous topside would be beneficial for the game overall. Adjusting `help crime` to allow a bit more leeway in when/how/where crimes can be committed without xhelp approval could make it more viable for the characters who want to bring conflict from the Mix topside. I think it would be healthy for corporate characters to have more reason to clutch their pearls when they see someone who looks like they're from the Mix walking a block behind them in Green than there is now.
Perhaps let's start with some small changes to how the Mix/Corporate dynamic works before focusing on large sweeping changes?
For my part, I've been chipping away at players trying to sequester themselves for years despite them fighting like hell against it. Mixers and corpos now rubbing shoulders (with the friction that entails) at topside social venues? That was because of me.
There's nothing at all about political gameplay or the types of archetypes supported by corporate play or anything about slice-of-life gameplay that requires, at an essential level, some characters living in special protected spaces separate from the rest.
Players want to for personal reasons, they don't need to for gameplay reasons.
Thank you for seeing the positive intention in what I wrote. You are spot on. I wrote what I wrote in a fairly antagonistic way because I wanted a response. For corporate characters who do fit the caricature put out there, they can shrug it off.
For others, who identified with what I wrote, it was probably a bit uncomfortable. And, that is okay. We do not grow in our comfort zone. Growth comes when we are presented with our weaknesses. Then, given opportunities to safely work on those weaknesses. Safe spaces to fail.
@Knyghtskye
Intentionally or not, your statement
I'll play the game my way, and if you don't like it, then we CAN'T write together." In case you miss the irony, this is EXACTLY what so many players are talking about in this thread. An entire part of the player base can effectively no sell and pretend that the very foundation of the game's theme DOES NOT EXIST. The foundation of the dystopian theme is that an oppressed, angry MAJORITY is being actively oppressed by a small minority. And that small minority's grasp on the levers of power is precarious, at best. And that people who fail to properly throw those levers in just the right way, are going to be removed from their position over the levers and cast down into the very masses of angry, violent, starving people who are on a daily basis, are doing unspeakable things simply to survive. To everyone, the response from @Knyghtskye is why it is so important to keep these conversations about game systems. About theme. NOT about specific individuals. @Knyghtskye I'd love to write stories with you. I think. I don't know how well you do, or don't write. But, my experience over the last 5 years here has been that by and large, the "average" player here is a very good, if not great, if not spectacular role player and story teller. The thing is, to take YOU and ME out of this… there is an entire portion of the player base that is effectively insulated from stories being told about them by the part of the player base that represents THE MAJORITY of the game world. I'm not talking about number of players. I'm talking about, the oppressed masses. THAT is the discussion here. The current state of the game, SEEMS to be supportive of a portion of the player base (not all of it. Not a majority of it. But, a measurable number of players) just no-selling and ignoring a huge part of the theme. People writing their stories in a way that other people are not allowed to be a part of.
As I was writing my last response, this clarified for me.
I do not buy for one second that playing a corporate, top side centric character is "risky" for the majority of top side characters.
And by risky I mean, the risk of being cast down into the Mix by powers beyond that character's control. And not, cast down into the Mix after 6-12 months of plotting by their rivals. I mean, 2-4 weeks of a couple of "bad life choices" and / or undercutting by their peers, away from living in the Mix.
I could be wrong. I have played a Junior corporate employee. They were constantly being undercut and at risk of falling. They were in that position due to 36+ months of baggage before they went top side. More so than because top side itself was risky.
It would be cool to have a poll.
"If you play a Mix based character, how confident are you that you could affect a corporate character given 1-3 weeks of plotting and planning?"
I bet that > 50% of the players (not characters, but actual players) would have little to no clue how to do that. Short of, having another top side character hiring them, and giving them a roadmap of how to do it.
What do the rest of you think?
I do not buy for one second that playing a corporate, top side centric character is "risky" for the majority of top side characters. And by risky I mean, the risk of being cast down into the Mix by powers beyond that character's control. And not, cast down into the Mix after 6-12 months of plotting by their rivals. I mean, 2-4 weeks of a couple of "bad life choices" and / or undercutting by their peers, away from living in the Mix.
When you enter into the world of corporate employment, it comes with myriad rules and expectations for a corporate character to follow; some are obvious, some are unspoken. They're typically:
Do not embarrass the corporation. Stay out of the Mix. Conduct all your affairs and businesses in the name of your corporation to get ahead. Don't associate with those dirty, murder hobos.
Thematically, you're supposed to be living under a constant pressure of being outperformed, outmaneuvered, and used at a moment's notice. Any mistake can cause you to be cast back down to the pits of poverty and starvation.
Realistically, the leash is longer than it probably should be. A lot of players play corporate characters like their positions are tenured when they're supposed to be fighting tooth and nail to keep their cushy lifestyles. There's a level of insulation that does make playing corporate more forgiving than it should be, and honestly, I think that's why we don't see the same level of cutthroat internal corporate feuding as we used to. Like, players used to be a lot more willing to fuck each other over in the name of winning their corporate ladder climb. Now, I see a lot of people coasting, and the ones who do get competitive don't seem to have that same sword hanging over their heads like they used to.
I've seen a lot of mistakes that corporate players make mistakes that end up not being used and weaponized by opposing corporations for whatever reason, including myself.
I've also seen a recent opportunity created to discredit another corporate player, but none of that corporate character's many enemies across the game did nothing to really exploit that situation and leverage it into something more that could really hurt them. Where's the threat of consequences and risks if no one bothers to try anymore?
"If you play a Mix based character, how confident are you that you could affect a corporate character given 1-3 weeks of plotting and planning?" I bet that > 50% of the players (not characters, but actual players) would have little to no clue how to do that. Short of, having another top side character hiring them, and giving them a roadmap of how to do it. What do the rest of you think?
I think the better starting question should be: Do you know how to pursue conflict meaningfully within the Mix? Do you understand how to create connections and business relationships based on mutual needs?
Because if players are struggling to drive conflict even within the Mix, then I don’t think the issue is that corpies are untouchable. It’s that conflict itself is harder to get moving across the board, and it’s not just a topside problem.
