[MUD-Dev] Usability and interface and who the hell is suppo

[Brandon J. Rickman]

On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, "Travis Casey" <efindel at polaris.net> replied:
>Brandon J. Rickman <ashes at pc4.zennet.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, "Travis Casey" <efindel at polaris.net> wrote:
>>>The orc draws his sword!
>>... of special dispensation for making a typo.

>Are there any muds which don't have a "time based interface" (by which I
>presume you mean a real-time interface, as opposed to a turn-based
>interface).  Turn-based seems like it would be impractical for a mud -- if
>one player has to go to the bathroom, should all the other players be put on
>hold until he/she gets back?

A lot of things seem impractical for muds (like ZenMOO), but some interface
questions can't be solved with the typical assumptions of real-time
mud interaction.  Yes, in a turn-based mud you would have to wait for
AFK players, and perhaps this is such a fundamental change that these new
turn-based games fall outside of [the petty world of] mud-dom.  Should
we talk about these new play-by-mail-ish mud games?

>>But being unprepared for what
>>the game is going to do is part of what playing the game is about, at least
>>I presume so in this case.  (It can be fun when a game surprises you so
>>suddenly that you physically jump.)
>
>You're making an assumption that the player was unprepared due to stupidity
>or
>carelessness -- I didn't specify what had happened before.  It's possible
>that
>the player just walked around a corner in a normally peaceful area and ran
>into
>an orc there.  Alternatively, you could replace the orc with another
>player --
>the character might be wandering around town, in a normally safe area, and
>suddenly be attacked by another player for no apparent reason.

So the player was unprepared due to stupidity, carelessness, or the
general unpredictability of the universe.  That the player made a typo
doesn't change the fact they were unprepared.  But to put it a different way,
you would like to design the interface in such a way that the player
would be prevented from making mistakes.  Why is is this an interesting
design goal?

>For that matter, on a more realistic mud, there are many times when a
>character
>might need to sheathe or put down a sword to have both hands free; for
>example,
>to do first aid on him/herself or a companion, to pick a lock, to read a
>scroll,
>to search an item for hidden compartments, or even to loot the body of a
>dead
>foe.

And in most games, setting down the sword _has no other consequence within
the game_.  But if you were a monster would you rather attack an armed or
an unarmed hero?  This has a lot to do with the music skill thread, but
in this case swordplay is considered a more useful activity.  Yet while
we are complicating the actions the character must take we keep trying
to simplify the actions of the player.

I think the really valuable conclusion of this
discussion is that character actions need to be
atomically scripted for the benefit of new players, but advanced players
would be able to rewrite the scripts to their personal level 
of sophistication.  And yes, this means that advanced players would be 
more vulnerable to typos, or "interface mistakes".

>In any case, though, it should be noted that typos are an artifact of the
>interface -- if the player actually *were* his/her character, it would be
>impossible for him/her to try to weld a sword when he/she meant to wield it.

Is there some kind of perfect one-to-one, artifact-free interface between
my mental self and the physical world?  If so, where can I buy one?
If the player actually *were* his/her character, what the heck is this
random skill check stuff?

>The point is that, were it not for the real-time nature of muds and their
>interfaces, such a "fumble" on the player's part would be impossible.  For
>those of us who prefer our muds to be more like paper RPGs and less like
>video games, this is a problem.

I would like to point out a possible gap between real-time _interaction_
and real-time _interface_.  The "real-time nature of muds" is characteristic
of the interaction, not the interface.

This reply has been stewing in my dead letter file long enough.  I'm
sure I haven't been nearly explicit enough in my opinions.

- Brandon Rickman - ashes at zennet.com -
While I have never previously found a need for a .sig, this
may be considered one for the purposes of this list