[MUD-Dev] question

[Koster]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu 
> [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
> Matthew Mihaly
> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 11:15 PM
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject: [MUD-Dev] question
> 
> 
> Say, question for those of you working on big graphical muds. Is anyone
> that you know of, besides the Shadowbane guys, focussing on group v. group
> interaction? Is anyone focussing on respect-based success mechanisms?
> Thanks.

All the upcoming graphical muds with any buzz are based on group vs. group.

Shadowbane uses dynamically formed groups, with an emphasis on guilds
building up townships. PvP is handled via territory, going from one guild's
lands to another's. They plan to support roles for different playstyles
within the  guilds. There is the ability to command people lower in the
hierarchy, etc.

Atriarch uses dynamically formed groups, but also has some sort of static
racial system overlaid. There is permanent death, but the ceoncept of
family, so that your standing is passed on to your "children." The world is
supposed to be very malleable, allowing city building, etc.

Horizons uses statically defined groups based on player races. The different
races have various predefind enmities, although you can break out of those
somehow. The races also have predefined territories. Many of the races are
"monsters" so there's a bit of that "players play the monsters" thing going
on.

Dark Ages of Camelot uses statically defined groups based on place of
origin. The theme is vaguely historical (sorry, Dave, but the art is
anything but! ;) and there are three (?) factions set up. Dave can probably
expand on this.

Whether any of them are respect-based, I dunno. I would guess that given the
emphasis on tactical PvP, there is the potential for it in all of them.

Wombat's Dark Zion was going to be very much a group vs. group
experience--if groups ever formed in the first place. The harsh environment
was designed to force interaction for survival.

Of course, among the potential big license games, it's hard to imagine any
that wouldn't require group vs group setups. Star Trek, Lord of the Rings,
Star Wars--all based on large-scale factional conflict, albeit with
statically defined groups rather than dynamic ones. AD&D is an exception,
I'd guess that if they made a game based on that, that it would be, well,
like AD&D. :)

-Raph



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