[MUD-Dev] Re: Affordances and social method

[Leach]

quzah <quzah at geocities.com> wrote:

	S. Patrick Gallaty <choke at sirius.com> wrote:
	>Brad Leach <leach.brad.ba at bhp.com.au> wrote:
> >|but then again, we were
> >|faced with the options of evolving into a society with culture, or
> at
> >|the other end of the scale - extinsion. As there are no consequences
> of
> >|any actions from a mud, I cant see any result apart from extinsion -
> >
> >You've hit upon a very interesting concept that I strongly suggest
> you
> >investigate.  You want to create a society on a mud?  Make something
> >that the mud has to work together to protect and create.
> >For instance, a mud that started out without technology like steel...
> >where players had to work to research it, mine it, to protect their 
> >hovels from the monsters who would actively attack the base 
> >town etc.
> >
> >Make extinction a real possibility... extinction meaning loss 
> >of technology, loss of some cooperatively gained bonuses...
> >loss of the infrastructure that makes things like metal armor and
> >domesticated animals possible... that makes magic and written
> >language possible.
> 
It sounds great to me! A well defined technology curve was something
that I have never considered before. I guess that my focus on the
timeline hasnt been as broad to include multiple-generations.

[Snip]

> An extreme idea here, I was thinking along the lines of doing
> something like:
> 
> --
> *poof, you're in the game now, after having created your identity*
> You are alone in a field, not knowing how you got here, or who you
> really are. (It's really lame, but how else do you explain their
> history in this setting.)
> 
> The world is without form, and void -- er.. You start in a field,
> and don't have anything. There are no towns. There are no cities,
> no tools, nada. You are alone (until you find some players). Have
> fun.
> --
> 
> The idea here is, if you want a town, you have to build one. If you
> want a tool, make it. :) The dawn of civilization. (gee that sounds
> corny) Granted, it's an interesting idea to toy with, but who would
> find it fun to play? Some would, but the public masses would hate
> it.
> 
I certainly think it could be an interesting toy to play with. A mud
with theme involving building (to provide tools to conquest?) as its
primary function. Sid Meier's "Civilization" certainly comes to mind
here. It seems, based on the success of online "build and conquer" games
such as Starcraft, that people enjoy that theme. I wonder how successful
it would be in a text only environment? Balance would be interesting -
the real advantage of current "build and conquer" games is that they
only last for a few hours - not a few months or years. How can the
environment be balanced so that it doesnt suffer from excessive growth,
over-population, polution, global meltdown, etc, etc?
I am certainly going to be thinking about this over the next few days
though. :-)

Cheers,
-Brad

<sig snipped>