[MUD-Dev] Re: Laws of Online World Design

[J C Lawrence]

On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 18:21:41 -0400 
James Wilson<jwilson at rochester.rr.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, J C Lawrence wrote:

> so, let me play straight man here. (ironically enough.)

Certainly.

> if LambdaMOO is/was such a success, what are you going to do to
> top it? that is, if it achieved a critical mass of expressive
> fertility, what was yet lacking that you would add?

Outside of the fact that I don't consider LM a success, but do
consider it a touchstone, as I've long discussed here, I'm going for
a goal-based game in an econmy/ecology driven universe which also
supports and encourages free user programming without interfering
with the process of goal definition and acquisition.  Much like LM,
the game will be specifically constructed for toy value (as versus
reality simulation), but will also, thru the basic physical laws
that the game mechanics rests on (which don't quite resemble RL at
all) which enforce logical correctness at the mechanical level,
allow prediction and mechanical construction (outside of scripting)
by players.  (If you cut Ororoborus in twain and pull on one end,
the other end will move).

> if it failed at some point, clearly it wasn't in the fecundity
> department. (cow-patties galore...) so maybe you have some other
> ideals in mind aside from expressive fertility.

<nod>

The "expressive fertility" is merely a new analytical tool I've
happened across which I feel casts some useful light and thus
pertains to Raph's law/slogan quest.

--
J C Lawrence                               Internet: claw at null.net
(Contractor)                               Internet: coder at ibm.net
---------(*)                     Internet: claw at under.engr.sgi.com
...Honourary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...