Tropico needs narcotraffikers!

[KC]

I don't know if you say the post I made in the x-pack ideas thread, but for me it's not going past page 2.

Anyway, we should be able to transport drugs to the US for big bucks   . And we should have the abilty to join with the US and shoot down narcotraffikers for Yanqui dollars. We could have up to 10 Su-25's for shooting them down.

[SSG_Troyer]

I read somewhere it was a concious design decision by PopTop to exclude drugs from this game.  I, for one, support this decision not to glorify this bane on our society.  While it might bring some "realism" to the table, this game isn't terribly "realistic" to begin with -- just FUN.

MWT

[skot]

i spoke about this in another thread and suggested that it might be interesting if a drug lord rose up on your island (sort of takes the responsibility away because it is an AI player), and then you could decide to fight him, ignore him, make money off him/with him, etc.

i also find it interesting that PopTop uses Cabarets (which i have NO problem with), and yet, they avoid the drug issue.  we have made this a bane on our society, and there are some societies that do not have this bane, some do not even make it illegal.  we could grow marijuana and ship it to the Netherlands.  This might cause problems with our relations with the USA, but they would have to respect the capitalist zeal of it.  You could just buy them off by continuing to fund their secret efforts by shipping poppy into Miami ...


-skot

[Mariachi]

Re: Tropico needs narcotraffikers!
Maybe importing los narcotrafficantes into the game would be just a little too much reality for los masses.
I think it's a great idea, though. Someone else suggested that Tropico needed a more robust secret police element. Hell, I say toss in indigenous uprisings, "disappearances," harboring of criminals from wars on other continents for wealth and technology, cultrally hybridized religious/magical cult intrigue, coca farms, an industry of cultural exportation (which can be bought out by multinationals from 1965 or so,) natural disasters, environmental damage effects, anti-torture edicts, a pan-Latin soap opera industry, a differentiation of political effects for legal and illegal immigration movements, mangoes, chilis, frijoles, y carne.

Anyway, I'm just really happy I got a good simulation game with good art, a very informed Latin theme, enough complexity to keep it from getting boring quickly, a parodic sense of humor, and a lot of variables. I wish the interface were a little better, but as with all games choose to cope.

I'd assume Poptop just said no to the narco element to keep things more generally upbeat and marketable on a wide scale. There's already considerable (if healthy) cause for controversy in what the game does include.  

Mariachi
Lindo Estado de Califas, E.U.

[El_Camino]

You left out Taco Hell!

[Mariachi]

How could I forget Taco Hell? Believe it or not, I saw one in Mexico City a couple of years ago. Why would anyone go there, there?  And then I saw one in Tijuana which wasn't really a real one, but was called the same thing, and even had the real company's logo hand-drawn on the building. I haven't seen any American-based fast food possibilities in Tropico, but I've only been playing for two days. I've been keeping the island as paradisical as possible for the Tropicans, but wouldn't mind giving the "slob" tourists some fast food for a little income.

[El_Camino]

Explain that to me.  When people go to another country on vacation, they always end up at McDonald's.  These are some of the same people who wouldn't darken the doorstep in their own country, yet they'll pay twice as much on foreign soil for the same lousy food.  Just so they can say they did it.  Pardon me while I slip out to the ABC for another pint of Tropican Rum....

[skot]

i have had many of my Tropicans say something like, "i need a meal from McTropico's" or something along the lines of making fun of fast food.  i think it would be nice, as well, because the best you can do is have a cheap, paper napkin restaurant, and it costs the same to build (obviously) as a high-priced, linen tablecloth restaurant (or whatever the highest quality is).

hmmm, i guess we have kind of gotten off track, but hey, we could put a little coca in the tacos and make them more addictive- <cough>, i meant "appealing" ....

oh, and on that note (addictive products), why cant we manufacture cheap cigarettes for local consumption ... hell, can we manufacture ANYTHING for the locals, do they do any shoppng besides for food? (which they get for free!)


-skot

[DrD]

I read somewhere it was a concious design decision by PopTop to exclude drugs from this game. -- just FUN.

MWT

Actually, they've already included the 2 drugs that have done the most damage to health and society - tobacco and alcohol.

But I do understand their decision, and besides, you can't have it all.

[5strong]

It would be cool if the religous and intelleuctal protest you for making tobacco and cigars.  And you get higher favor if you stop making it.

[Dravin]

It would be cool if the religous and intelleuctal protest you for making tobacco and cigars.  And you get higher favor if you stop making it.

Why the intellectuals? Isn't the very pinnacle of such a faction being in a fancy room with your friends sipping fine cognac and smoking cigars while talking about the latest social experiment?

[5strong]

your picture seems more like a capitalist meeting, i see intelluctals as teachers and the like who tell you that smoking is bad for your lungs.  But then again my 3rd grade teacher smoked like a chimney.....

[skot]

i still go back to something i said earlier ... why cant we manufacture goods for local consumption?  a cigarette break might help those unhappy workers, and we could build smoking lounges (or social clubs) for our elite as well as elite tourists.

and i heartily agree with dravin, intellectuals would seem to enjoy the pasttime of sitting around smoking cigars.  oh, and why dont we have coffeehouses?

more, more, more PopTop - the ultra-complex economy expansion pack...

-skot

[El_Big_Cheese]

I'm only going to say this once...

If God would come down and ask the whole world which one do we want to get rid of for good, drugs or murder (including wars, killings, etc)?  What would we choose?

Now I can see where some kid playing this game would be asked by his parents  "are you winning your new game?"  Kid replies "Yea, I just sold 100 kilos to the states, and I'm making tons of money"  <parent outraged>  

But is it any better for it sound like this?  Parent  "are you winning your new game?"  Kid replies  "Yea, I was losing this election but I had my opponent shot out in the middle of the street."  

So I hope PopTop didn't not include drugs because it would send the wrong message because cute or not this game is about an adult subject matter.  And including drugs would only make it more realistic...

[5strong]

Tropico however is given a teen rating ,so if a kid gets his hand on it, its not legally Poptop's fault.  Morally probably.

[miwi]

well that all sounds to me like the typical american double morale - dont show naked stuff in public but having the largest porn industry of the world.
Or USA having the biggest drug market of the world and blaming Colombia to be guilty for that.
Or wondering why so many kids doing amok shooting - watch american TV or films, all that stupid action sh*t, only violence and killing, so what the heck the are wondering about The same BTW for computer games, all the 3D shooter etc.
Even here in forum you can't write the word @#$%, only like this (F**ck) - ridiculous !

Anyway, narcotrafico should be definitely included, if you want simulate the reality of an diktator state.
It doesn't change anything if you try to hide the reality.
And from a "morale" point of view I don't see a big difference of "eliminating" - means shoot down and kill - your opponent or to simulate a part of the drug business.

[skot]

here, here, miwi!  TOTALLY agree with you on the double-standard thing.

dad: "hey, son, how are you doing on your game, there?"

son: "i just blew the sick snot out of a million lifeforms running around in my 3D point-of-view"

or ...

son: "i just balanced the economy, provided jobs & homes for the poor, subsidized entertainment, but some people didnt see things my way, so i had to whack them out or throw them in jail."


violence is okay in american culture but sex, drugs, & rock-n-roll are not?  what kind of crazy, @#$%ed-up moral system is that?  (note the weird, cartoon expletive thing, which is NOT the way i phucking wrote it)  if we had more sex, drugs, & rock-n-roll, we'd be too happy to kill each other.  

right now in america, thanks to dried-up ole b*tches like nancy reagan, tipper gore, hillary clinton, etc., it is SO pc to HATE drug users, so we can treat them worse than rapists, murders, etc.  what is wrong with doing a line of coke or a hit of acid?  no, no, no!!!  but killing a few people, go right ahead, and here is the gun to do it.

what a crock - let us think for ourselves for a change, bring on the guns, bring on the prisons, bring on the drugs, bring on the sex, bring it all on!!!



-skot, needs sedation ...

[ElPresidente]

I simply cannot believe the pro-drug attitudes on here.  Do you really believe that people sitting around on drugs is a good thing, and this includes Sweden which now has 60% of it's youth in rehab?  Every society that engages drug use regrets it and society as a whole suffers a lower standard of living from it even if they don't fight it.  Now, I realize no arguement is going to convince someone that wants to do drugs that they shouldn't, so I really don't worry about you guys, go ahead get high and pat yourselves on the back.  But the rationale that peace would reign if everyone simply dropped acid or shot up is absurd and doesn't match the realities of drug use.  Many violent crimes are committed by people on drugs who would never do so otherwise, and there is simply no good measure for all the lost productivity and time lost from pursuits that are ultimately more meaningful for the individual.  Drugs make people feel good, but even if they don't rule you physically they will emotionally.  The emotional and spiritual holes people use drugs to plug (and don't try to tell me your on a trip to find enlightment, that is bs and you know it) simply stay open, they are never filled.  Reach up, not down.  Show me how many achievers in society are regular hard drug users.  Sex is one thing, Rock is just a phase growing up, but drugs are simply a trap.  Before you go flaming, realize, I am in favor of making marijuana legal.  It's side effects are no worse than alcohol or tobacco, but if you @#$% up on it like the idiot who derailed the train and killed like 10 people, your ass goes to the chair for being such a irresponsible dumbass.  Same for anyone harming anyone else while under the influence.  If people could take responsibility for their actions while on drugs I would take a more accepting stance, but people won't.  Hell people can barely be responsible enough to raise children these days, don't give them something to make it worse.  Just imagine how proud you would feel to be laying there tripping and your kids are waiting to be fed or clothed, while you wallow in your own sh*t.  Please people, stop being trendy and think.

[skot]

i, for one, am not being trendy, and i do think, thank you very much, and you have fallen for a common trap, el presidente (love the name), simply because i am pro-drug user does not mean i am one, which i am not.  

"But the rationale that peace would reign if everyone simply dropped acid or shot up is absurd and doesn't match the realities of drug use."

i agree with you on this one, and i have seen too many people in a heroin stupor to think that it is any way attractive to me.  i also think life is absurd with or without drugs.  i also think some really uptight assholes could do with some good drugs or sex every once in awhile - prozac, condom, cocaine, flesh, whatever.

"Many violent crimes are committed by people on drugs who would never do so otherwise,"

okay, but you could not ever know this for sure.  you do not know if someone might have had a predisposition to crime, and if they commit a violent crime, punish them for that, NOT drug use.  Punish the person, not the drugs.

"and there is simply no good measure for all the lost productivity and time lost from pursuits that are ultimately more meaningful for the individual."

i love this one.  you are right, there is no measure, because the measure of one's life is done by that person and that person alone.  what is productivity, anyway?  is it wasting our lives by contributing to a mind-numbing status quo which will chew us up and forget us when we are dead?  and what pursuits that are so meaningful are the drugs keeping people from?  going to work, being with family, going to church, painting a picture, writing a song, drafting a corporate policy?  all of it only means something if it means something to that individual - no more, no less.

"Drugs make people feel good, but even if they don't rule you physically they will emotionally."

this is also something you can never prove.  not all drugs make people feel good and not all drugs rule people emotionally.  life rules people emotionally?  well, people should rule themselves.  taking a hit of acid once every 6 months is nothing compared to constantly obsessing over keeping one's computer free of dust or playing Tropico 12 hours a day.

"The emotional and spiritual holes people use drugs to plug (and don't try to tell me your on a trip to find enlightment, that is bs and you know it) simply stay open, they are never filled.  Reach up, not down."

i love this one, too.  people are not necessarily looking to fill holes while doing drugs, and those most certainly are looking to fill holes when they do such things as .... hm, i dont know, go to church.  let's trade one dependence for another, eh?  very self-fulfilling - slave to drugs, slave to church?  hmmm, which do i choose?  and people can open avenues of awareness in their lives through regimented and controlled drug use.  if you think spirituality can only be achieved in a building beneath a cross, you are very wrong.

and the comment about reach up, not down, what is that supposed to me?  i can only assume you are ascribing some culturally-constructed bias to the concept that "down" is wrong or negative, and that any and all drug use is wrong, and that if one were to "just say 'no'", they would be able to look "up", which is right.  you may also be refering to looking up as symbolically associated with religious pursuit and that is about as much hogwash as i have heard.

let us look for salvation, let us all play the constant @#$%-me game by finding holes in ourselves to fill up with whatever pop bullsh*t comes along for the moment.  i feel that if you find worth and value in yourself, then you find true independence.  i do think most people are not capable of handling themselves, but i also think continuing to coddle them is not the answer ....  


-skot

[El_Big_Cheese]

I was just saying that having drugs in Tropico is no worse then it already having murder, bribery, etc.  I didn't mean to start the whole "drugs are bad" thing.  I just want them in the game to make it more realistic and to create a more dynamic game.  But I do understand that I do live in America where parents these days want other people to raise their childern for them, but also don't want to take the responsibility for them.  And drugs are a touchy subject, so I can see why they aren't in the game.  

I just can't see why people are cool with killing people in games, but not cool with the fact that some small island counties have made tons of money through these *ahem* channels of distribution.

Like I said before, it just seems weird that you can't export 100 kilos of whatever to support your people, but you can have someone killed when things aren't going your way.  just seems odd...   :-/

[A-54]

i wanna play as Pablo Escobar, coke-lord turned dictator!

[Joaquin_Stick]

Hmmmmm... where do I start? Oh yeah...

>I simply cannot believe the pro-drug attitudes on here.  

Pro-drug? Let's be realistic here. To deny that Mar Caribe is not constructed if not sustained by the trafficking of narcotics (specifically but not limited to cocaine, which has hella markup value from a marketing standpoint) into the most aggressively and insatiably buzz-thirsty corner of the planet, North America, is to overlook the fact that... well, people feed their children and raise families, provide blue waters for the selfsame consumers to dive into to alleviate stress and be - tourists. Imagine that. The trickle-down effect of the narcotics trade is more like a flood-down. The narcotics trade builds hospitals, schools, platforms for education and advancement (sound familiar?). People are making a veritable mint from the trade and never touch a grain of the stuff.

>Do you really believe that people sitting around on drugs is a good thing, and this includes Sweden which now has 60% of it's youth in rehab?  

That's 3 out of 5. Come on.

>Every society that engages drug use regrets it

Is there a "society" that doesn't engage in drug use? Show me one and I'll give you first dibs on a bridge in Brooklyn.

After that para-puritanical and vacuuous attempt to apply subjective reality to a socioeconomic situation that defies logic, I must say this: I know that PopTop declined to make narcotics an issue. I wish they'd said the hell with the teen rating and include something, because the narcotics trade *is* Mar Caribe, and it pervades every level of life there, especially politics. I think what people here are griping about is desiring more depth to a game - which at this point, I must add, is as completely divorced from reality as 60% of teenagers in Sweden being in drug abuse rehabilitation - that already kicks boot-ay. They, much like I, want that extra scope that makes Mar Caribe what it is - a channel for narcotics to reach their destination.

[ElPresidente]

Did I ever accuse you of being a drug user?  I walked into no trap, I never assumed you did use them and never stated such a thing.  You inferred that.  I know several pro-drug folks who are not users.  I simply questioned the general attitude in this thread.

On the question of violence and drugs, it is proven.  Numerous studies of folks who use hard drugs shows that violent acts are highly correlative to use.  Once under the influence, your chances of violent behaviour multiply.  This is not simple, was-high-at-the-time-of-the-crime counting either.  Just like alcohol, the use of any significant mood-altering drug makes violence more likely as the inhibitions to act are removed.  This is proven, not fancy.

On the productivity, I misspoke in retrospect.  It IS measurable.  Detected instances of drug use and the effects it has within businesses is well known and documented, and it's not anti-drug propaganda.  Drug use on the job causes numerous problems including accidents and high rates of sick time being taken, along with theft and antisocial behaviour.  My point about it's meaning is, how drug users say "gee, you know, I really feel better about my life since I started snorting coke?".  Come on, get real.  It's an escape, nothing more.  People need to learn to work out their issues, not hide from them.  The image of people laughing and just "hanging out" or blissfully having spiritual experiences on drugs is a lie in the long run, and it's anything but an enlightening experience which was an image cast by LSD.  The immeasurable part was the human toll, the relationships destroyed by drugs, the small things like unchanged children, unclean habitations, general neglect.  How do you measure such things which always show up in the hard core drug users environment?

Reach up, dont reach down is not just some relative cultural-bias (my god the 60's move to relativism reeks in this thread).  When you alter your nervous system to such a degree as hard drugs do, you don't elevate to a higher mental plane, you sink down the chain, you become more animal like (acid maybe not).  This is not relativism, or the old cry of cultural relativism, it is observable fact.  The relativism is, you just want to do it no matter what the outcome and look for any arguement to defend your desires despite the obvious implications.

Most hard core drugs are addicting emotionally and physically.  This is so proven that I think it's laughable to even question it.  Christ, man, half the over the counter stuff is addictive, how could you think coke is not.  Clearly, acid use, the one major example that is used to drive the rest of the arguement for drugs (thank you George Orwell) does not apply to most hard core drugs.  Acid is not addictive, and there is proof that significant mental changes (sometimes good, sometimes not) can occur in individuals.  Folks doing cocaine, heroin, crack, etc etc don't fall into this category even remotely.  Those drugs are addictive and create huge dependency issues.  This is fact, it is proven.

As for spirituality, I never ever mentioned Religion did I?  In fact, I am virtually an atheist so I would say it's clear you read religion into it.  One truth that is irrefutable: people living healthy, psychologically balanced lives have no need for drugs and almost exclusively don't take them.  Why?  Perhaps it is because the needs that human beings derive happiness from aren't satisfied by chemical abuse, drugs are just distractions from life.  Other outlets are more meaningful, and even taking your arguement, the percentage of folks that would have meaningful spiritual growth from drug use is laughably small and would never warrant legal use.

Coddling people?  By not allowing them to have whatever they so choose is coddling?  Hmmmm....we have different definitions of coddling my friend.

Like I said, hard drug users will never come around, it is using such flimsy arguements as "you can never prove" when there is ample evidence all around that show the psychology involved.  It is, I want it, and I will go to any length of arguement to excuse what I want to do, and try to tear down any arguements by using inconsequential exceptions to the contrary is the typical form the arguements take.  Thank you Skot for illustrating the logic of the drug movement.  It is not one of core uniting principles, but one of "exception proves the rule" counter-point specific half-arguements that fortunately, most people realize is bogus.  'Nuff said.

[ElPresidente]

The 60% number is the official Swedish figure from three years ago.  You may not like it, but they reported it, not me.

As for drugs supporting a country, I didn't even discuss this one way or the other.  Frankly, I think that it would have made the game pretty dadgumed easy if the money is that cheap.  OTOH, if Poptop had tied a deathtoll to the export of drugs (like a happiness score) as a negative, it would have made for an interesting scoring system balanced against economic benefit to represent disfavor for the country in the world.  At the very least, threats to invade or withold funding could have played in.  I am not opposed to the idea, just the attitude that drugs are something to uphold as a symbol of freedom and intellectually enlightened values, it just not.

[El_Big_Cheese]

err... we aren't going down the right track here.  I'm not defending or approving the use of drugs here but this just has to be said; I'm educating.  

Drugs don't do anything (or provide) the body with anything that the body dosen't already provide itself.  Drugs are just "triggers"  thats all.  They make the body release certain chemicals, albeit sometimes in a higher dose then the body would normally release.  Have you ever herd of "runners high" or wonder why people jerk-off?  It's to release these chemicals.  Chocolate and sex (masterbation) trigger the brain in the exact same why.  People find these releases through running, sex, meditation, certain foods, etc.  When you are watching a war moving on the TV and a guy gets is arm shot off and doesn't even feel it, it's cause of these chemicals in the brain.  Drugs are just shortcuts.  People don't want to run 10 or 15 miles, they just want to stick a straw up their noses.

I could go on for hours, but I don't want to sound like I'm defending drug use.  I just think it needs to be in the game to make it more realistic.  I do respect your opinions, though I just want you to look at it from other viewpoints.