Linden dollars, the currency of American online game-Second Life, can be converted into real U.S. dollars at an exchange rate of 250:1. In recently world, online game is not only a game. Can you image that people using the money earned in games to buy foods, clothes, and so on in the real world? In my point of view, game companies should not launch the game currency exchange into real world.
First of all, this will destroy the financial balance of the real society. If the game companies can decide how much currencies they issue into the visual market, and those visual currencies can change into real money, that means the game companies have the right to issue real currencies, which should be the unique right of the bank. In the real world, the demand of currencies depend on a number of factors-from the interest rate to the level of economic growth, while in the visual game, the demand is based on the limited license rights to use the ceratin features of the game, which the two are definitely not equal.
In the real world, the government and the whole country decide the currency supplied, but in the game world, even one person can control the economy systerm, so the visual economic market is too astatic to link up with the real one.
On the second place, this conduct will give people more reasons to indulge in games. Many people wallow in the visual life in the online game, now the convertible currencies make the game much more real, it will be harder for them to get out of game world. Now the player will have new excuse to rebute that they have wasted too much time on games-they can earn money! It is really not a good news for the people with poor backbone.
Some people arise that there is no big difference between the visual currency and real currency, because people also need to spend time and energy to earn money in game. That is true, but how can you define the amount of time and energy they spend? Is it equal to the time and energy required to earn the same money in the real world? Furthermore, if it is a suitable way to earn money, why do not all the people just stay at home and play games?Obviously, online game currency will break the balance of the society, it should not be exchanged and used in the real world. A visual world with a real market, how creazy it is! Since our world can not keep up with the pace of renovation of Internet technology very well, it is too soon for us to combine the real life and visual world together.
ReferencesFayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management, (trans. C. Storrs). London,Pitman.
Lamond D (2003). Henry Mintzberg vs Henri Fayol: of lightouses, cubists and the emperor's new clothes. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 8, Iss. 4, p.5.
Lamond D (2004). A matter of style: reconciling Henri and Henry. Management Decision, 42, 1/2, p. 330.
Micheal, J, F (2000) Fayol stands the test of the time. Journal of Management History, Vol.6, No.8, p.345-360.
Pavett, C. M., Law, A. W. (1982). Management roles, skills and effective performances. Academy of Management Proceeding, p.95-99.
Robbins, S, Bergman, R, Stagg, I & Coulter, M. (2006) Management, Australia,PearsonWren, D.A., Bedeian, A. G. & Breeze, J.D. (2002). The foundations of Henri Fayol's administrative theory. Management Design, 40/9, p. 906-918.
Weick, K. E. (1974). The nature of managerial work. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.19, Iss.1, p.111-118.