[MUD-Dev] Re: WIRED: Kilers have more fun

[Koster]

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mike Sellers [SMTP:mike at bignetwork.com]
> Sent:	Monday, June 29, 1998 12:53 PM
> To:	mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject:	[MUD-Dev] Re: WIRED: Kilers have more fun
> 
> At 11:03 AM 6/29/98 -0500, Koster, Raph wrote:
> Doesn't surprise me a bit that you don't fit the classic profile. :-)
> The
> places you've spent time and the way you live your life now no doubt
> have
> afforded you experiences that give you perspective that is largely
> missing
> in others.  This is also why, IMO, people with a background in
> theatre,
> philosophy, english, and other perspective-widening domains often do
> well
> if they can transfer those skills to building online software.  
> 
Oh yeah--my background is liberal arts, no CS background whatsoever. I
think that DOES make a difference at every level of the mud's design. I
know that one of the top draws on LegendMUD was always the atmosphere,
the writing, etc, and that was largely due to the backgrounds of the
people involved--philosophy, history, writing, and literature students.

> >I think we have to share the blame. For that matter, I don't consider
> it
> >"blame" as such as a plain old recognition of facts.
> I guess it slides from facts to blame for me when I'm on the receiving
> end
> of a dismayed, disgruntled player who feels like they didn't get what
> they
> thought they were going to get online (would you believe that I've
> even had
> some disgruntled UO players complain to me!? ;-) ). I think we need to
> provide a better experience, and a better environment.  It won't
> happen
> tomorrow, but it will happen.
> 
Yep. And I've had M59 and Realm players complain to me, go figure. Maybe
they think we're all in cahoots or something, and meet on obscure
Internet mailing lists to discuss how to control them--oh, wait. Hmm. :)

> Nor I.  But I guess I take a somewhat more Jeffersonian view: people
> _will_
> rise to the self-governance we allow them to have.  Not all of them of
> course, but enough to make it work for all (or almost all) of them.  
> 
Right--it's that small figure we have to rely on. My experience has been
that you often get enough people to run the government, but often (not
always) fail to get enough for the necessary policing. Hence my emphasis
on methods to foster player policing--thus far I am VERY pleased with
the rep system, which seems to have taken a big step towards resolving
this issue for UO.

> >To get back to what you said, I think that a pure roleplay game of
> large
> >size will have to be a Stalinist setup, yes. And I don't LIKE it.
> Then
> >again, I think that MANY muds currently use such a restrictive setup.
> 
> Here we disagree.  I think I understand where you're coming from, but
> in
> fact I believe that to make large role-playing games viable
> (business-wise)
> we will *have* to move beyond the neo-Stalinist setup with which we
> are all
> currently saddled.  It won't be easy, but I think it will ulitimately
> be
> extremely rewarding.  
> 
I am referring to a true, fullbore totally immersive RP, always IC,
never OOC, experience here. That's what so many ask for quite loudly,
and what I believe Marian was referring to. I think something mass
market won't get there. :( A "role-playing game"--sure. But a game
wherein everyone is roleplaying--no.

[snipped many many things on which we agreed]

-Raph