In this fantasy world woven by code, there exists a startling truth: the virtual and the real have never been two entirely separate islands. Taking the new character “Xia Kong,” soon to debut in the gaming ocean of “Canghai,” as an example, we glimpse a startling similarity—the resource system in the game world is eerily akin to the resource allocation mechanisms in human society, as if it were a virtual projection of the real world.
On this digital land, the enhancement of character abilities resembles a intricate algorithm, relying on a vast network of resources. From the most basic low-frequency tide erosion nuclei to the rare high-frequency tide erosion nuclei, every resource is like a meticulously designed gear, forming a complex system. Not to mention those exceedingly rare resources like Phosphorus Osteoclasis and Golden Fleece—they are the crucial components of this massive machine, playing pivotal roles in the game world.
This hierarchical resource system is like a mirror, reflecting the stratification of resource levels in the real world. Just as high-quality educational and advanced medical resources flow toward specific groups in real life, different levels of resources in the game world also flow to various players in their unique ways. This similarity is not coincidental; it is a profound insight by game designers into the laws of human society.
Even more intriguing is how the acquisition of resources in the game world mirrors mechanisms of social division of labor and cooperation. Just as no single individual can accomplish all tasks independently in the real world, obtaining certain rare resources in the game also requires teamwork. For instance, acquiring Phosphorus Osteoclasis requires defeating specific enemies, while Golden Fleece might necessitate particular scenarios or transactions. These diverse acquisition methods hint at a profound truth: in a world of resource scarcity, cooperation and exchange are often the most effective ways to obtain resources.
The in-game resource trading system takes this social interaction to new heights. In this virtual economy, players can exchange materials using virtual currency called “贝币” (Bèi Coins). This design is strikingly similar to the principles of commercial transactions in the real world. The scarcity of resources, supply and demand relationships, and the convenience of transactions—all these fundamental economic principles are perfectly exemplified in the game world.
From the perspective of resource utilization, the application of the scarcity principle by game designers is nothing short of ingenious. The advancement of characters at different levels requires the consumption of varying quantities and types of resources. This design not only ensures the game’s challenging nature but also maintains the balance of the resource system. This mechanism bears a striking resemblance to optimization issues in resource allocation in the real world. Just as economists study how to optimize resource allocation to maximize benefits, game designers continuously adjust the difficulty of resource acquisition and usage costs to maintain the stability of the entire gaming economy.
From a sociological perspective, the resource system in the game essentially constructs a miniature social system. In this system, players must acquire and allocate resources through individual effort and social interaction. This social behavior in the virtual world has an essential connection to economic activities in the real world. Just as players form alliances to obtain rare resources in the game, businesses and individuals in real life constantly compete and cooperate to secure scarce resources.
The hoarding of resources in the game is also comparable to saving behavior in real life. Players need to plan ahead and stockpile resources to meet future skill enhancement needs. This behavior aligns with the economic principles of delayed gratification and long-term investment in human society. In the real world, individuals save money for future needs, much like how players in the game hoard resources for upcoming challenges. Both actions reflect a similar rationality in planning for the future.