[MUD-Dev] Re: Marion's Tailor Problem

[Caliban Tiresias Darklock]

On 10:05 AM 8/18/98 -0400, I personally witnessed s001gmu at nova.wright.edu
jumping up to say:
>
>The problem with disallowing PKill/PSteal is that a lot of people on here
>are advocates of a more 'pure' simulation type game.  

This is something I've had somewhat of a problem with for my entire time on
the list. It seems like "MUD development" is often seen as meaning "Making
MUDs more realistic". I always thought it meant "Making MUDs more fun",
which for some people might mean making them more realistic, but realism
and fun are not by any means synonymous. 

You always have the natural tendency of people to go out and do things that
are fun for THEM at the expense of others. Dr. Cat has said that this is
just not acceptable in a commercial endeavour, but when you think about it,
the *reason* it isn't acceptable is quite simply because it upsets players
and drives them away from the game... and I don't think that's acceptable
in any game, commercial or no. Anything that causes players to become upset
and leave the game is Bad. Much of this can be avoided by presenting an
accurate picture of what the game consists of; when you don't do this,
there are misconceptions that arise and the natural tendencies of players
will fill in the gaps. Unfortunately, some people will fill this gap with
something "kinder and gentler" and others will fill it with something
vicous and antisocial. This results in some nasty clashes. 

Another problem I see in MUDs is that they're often presented as being
computer RPGs. With RPG style gaming on computers, you have an annoying
problem. There are three major RPG pursuits -- roleplaying, problem
solving, and combat. Roleplaying is impossible to code, and *ongoing*
problem solving is very difficult to code. Think about a game like "The
Seventh Guest" -- lots of problem solving and puzzles, but after you play
it once or twice, you're done. Combat, however, can be run effectively by
the computer... so we worry mainly about creating "good" combat systems.
Except those systems are *still* tedious and unchallenging. So we apply
them to other players.

I think much of the problem with MUDs comes from the "all things to all
people" mentality. We want it all. That's natural. But the old axiom of
being nothing to no one applies; if you try to do everything, you'll do it
badly. A small, well-defined set of goals can prevent the game from
becoming overly difficult to code and play.

>I've been doing a
>lot of game-design-soul-searching of late, and have come to a few tenative
>solutions that differ considerably from previous oppinions I've held.

I'd really like to hear about these solutions and the thought processes
that resulted in them. Once you get a chance, I'd be very interested in
seeing some elaboration.

---
=+[ caliban at darklock.com ]=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=[ http://www.darklock.com/ ]+=
"It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more 
doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a 
new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by 
the preservation of the old institution, and merely lukewarm defenders in 
those who would gain by the new one."              -- Niccolo Machiavelli
=+=+[ FREE KEVIN * http://www.kevinmitnick.com/ * IT COULD BE YOU ]+=+=+=