[MUD-Dev] Self-Sufficient Worlds

[Zak Jarvis]

> From: Lee Sheldon [linearno at gte.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2000 10:03 AM


>> From: Zak Jarvis [zak at voidmonster.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2000 4:19 AM

>> The very entertaining lives which created highly
>> readable autobiographies were quite interactive. I never claimed
>> that everyone's life was interesting enough for the treatment,
>> only that if some autobiographies are interesting then narrative
>> must have an ability to be interactive. Were their lives less
>> interactive because they were more interesting?

> I'm not arguing level of interactivity, but level of ability to
> communicate.

Indeed, and I have no doubt why.  See my previous post (which you also
replied to). Heh.  What I'd meant to be arguing from the get-go was that if
there can be interesting *biographies* (not *auto*biographies) then the
process of building story must be interactive.

>> Quality storytelling has been going on for much longer than
>> there have been 'real' writers. It wasn't invented by
>> Sin-Leqi-Unninni when he carved Gilgamesh, or any of the
>> priests, scribes or accountants who'd done so before him.

> Phooey.  Of course it has.  My point was that if human beings
> who have led exceptionally interesting lives have difficulty
> communicating those lives to others, then maybe relying on
> people who have not for your entertainment might be a risky
> proposition.

I don't think I had a particularly good point there, I was mostly a bit
torqued at your term 'real writers'. It came across to me as overly
dismissive and ill-defined.

>> What I'm saying is that when you have thousands of people in a game
>> simultaneously, it can become effectively impossible to
>> create narratives that matter to both the players and the world.

> I couldn't disagree more strongly.

Can you give me an example of how you tell a compelling story using 2000
people at the same time without using a huge degree of automation? I simply
don't think it can be done.

>> So, what I've been trying to design is a framework which
>> will allow the little stories of players lives in the game
>> to plug into the real overarching story of the game, and for
>> that story to be influenced by the players. Influenced in
>> meaningful and dynamic ways.

> A perfectly valid approach to a necessary goal, but if it is the
> ONLY method you're using, then I fear the result may not be as
> meangful and dynamic as you hope.

Have a look at my overview of a proposal for a system to do this and tell
me where you think it will fail in that regard. It seems pretty solid to
me, and I posted it specifically so it could be examined and taken apart.

>> want to do without building these tools. Unfortunately, we've
>> not gotten to a stage in development where I get to really do
>> what I'm there for, so instead you lot get to put up with my
>> ranting. ;)

> I don't mind.  I hope you don't mind getting ranted back at. :)

How can I ever expect my scalpels to cut if I don't sharpen them on a
regular basis? ;) Indeed, the ranting back is what I'm looking for.

-Zak Jarvis
 http://www.voidmonster.com






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