[MUD-Dev] Birthday Cake (or Why Large Scale Sometimes Sucks) (long)

[Matthew Mihaly]

On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, J C Lawrence wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jun 2000 00:00:40 +0000 (GMT) 
> 
> Consider, if a defined set of VR mannerisms, agreed-upon social
> values, etc does end up being evolving, where will it most likely
> start, and what will most likely drive it?  Where is the activity in
> that realm *currently* happening?  What is different about where it
> is happening now as versus where it was happening 15 years ago?


My point is: agreed upon by whom? Though the net offers unparalleled
possibilities for globalization, it seems to me that it's likely that very
diverse sub-cultures will arise, with completely different values, and so
on. I think we see the beginnings of this sort of thing in something as
seemingly trivial as d00d speak. I'm not sure if you're asking if there
will be one universally shared set of values, but I'd certainly hope there
will not be. 

 
> > Why do we _need_ all sorts of people in a VR space? 
> 
> We don't.  That's not the problem.  The problem, if you wish, is
> that we can't get rid of them, and we can't stop them coming.  They
> are the 10,000 Quake players descending on Furcadia.

Are 10,000 Quake players descending on Furcadia? You also most certainly
can get rid of them if you are willing to create barriers to entry. 


> While it is easy to consider AOL as a MUD (MUD-Dev is a MUD strikes
> again), what happens when we start getting MUD-like games and
> environments with populations as large as if not larger than AOL?
> What happens when the 'net becomes a place, and that place is
> defined and presented in terms of a game populated by tens if not
> hundreds of millions of people and companies?

That place already exists. It's the Internet and the users of it. We're in
constant contact via e-mail, ICQ, newsgroups, etc. There are hundreds of
millions of people and companies there. A mud is only a place if you think
of it as one. I don't really see much difference between a mud and the net
as a whole I guess, except that a mud will tend to be more strictly
organized (though I view that as an incidental feature of mud-iness).

You walk down a street in a mud and see a bunch of doors leading to
various shops or rooms containing people chatting. You go to Yahoo and see
a bunch of links leading to various shops or places containing people
chatting. Is there a fundamental difference? 
 
> Yes, I'm being over-weaning and grandiose.  No, I don't know this
> will happen this way, or that we're in the fragile beginnings of
> that motion.  Gibson's Idoru presents one possible niche view via
> his "walled city".  While the whole killfile evolution may be
> stretched, I'd argue that the basic concept is supportable -- more
> especially so if you put games underneath it.

> > I agree they aren't just games, but c'mon, they aren't THAT big a
> > deal.  
> 
> Could they be?

That largely depends on how seriously you take life! I don't take it all
that seriously, so no, they can't be. Seriously though, no, I don't think
games can be. I think that when they become truly important, they will no
longer resemble games, and the gaming industry will not be the ones
running them. Of course, this may be merely a semantical argument. There's
nothing to say that one of the current online games companies won't step
up and move into that space, but I think that the nature of the product
will be such that it will cease to be referred to as a games company.

--matt




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev