Hiding the Numbers (was Re: [MUD-Dev] Maintaining fiction.)

[Matt Mihaly]

On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, John Buehler wrote:
> Derek Licciardi writes:
 
>> Games are played to win.(ie keep score in some way to determine a
>> winner(extremely loosly defined here), be they points, items,
>> skills, or whatnot.)
 
> I'll avoid getting into the semantics of what a game is, whether a
> MUD is a game, and so forth.  Such statements always seem to lead to
> 'dictionary wars'.  I do, however, want to contend that MUDs are not
> about 'winning'.  Not even in the general sense.  They are about
> entertainment.  I certainly won't begin to argue the point that many
> players derive much of their entertainment by comparison against
> game metrics or against other player's accomplishments in the game.

Hey, check it out, John and I agree. The only explanation for that
must be that we're right. =) Seriously though, that's spot on. My
entire philosophy of Achaea is, in fact, based around the fact that
points, skills, equipment are not the point of the game. The point is
really up to the players, but I'd sum it up mainly as seeking respect
of other players either through ability at playing the game-like
aspects of the world (combat, etc), being a good political or
religious leader, etc. Almost none of those accomplishments (and I'd
argue that it's a lot more impressive to define a city charter and
organize a large mass of players into an ideologically-motivated force
than it is to bash a bunch of monsters with bad AI and get some
equipment while increasng stats) are even capable of direct
comparison. There's no way to directly compare the career of one
political leader to another, for instance.


>> Online games have a social aspect to them and in the real world we
>> constantly compare ourselves and our things to everyone and
>> everything else.(If you say that you don't you're lying to
>> yourself)
 
> If you say I must, then you are missing out on another way of
> viewing life.  It's a question of degree.  To some, the comparison
> is important.  To others, it is not.  I suspect the Dalai Lama and
> the Pope really aren't all that worried about how they compare with
> others on any axis.  No, I don't believe that they're concerned with
> being more humble, holy or wise than other people.  And I only
> mention those extremes because examples like them are usually
> mentioned in order to counter my point.

I agree with Derek here. First, if you think the Pope doesn't compare
himself, you haven't been paying attention to the discrete lobbying
that's currently going on among the Catholic cardinals, in the
expectation that one of their number will soon be voted in as
Pope. Remember, the Pope is a political position. As for the Dalai
Lama, I'm sure he'd be the first to tell you that while he believes
strongly in the tenets of his Buddhism, he's not perfect and no doubt
does suffer from comparison syndrome on occasion.

Having said that, simply because we compare our selves to other people
sometimes does not at all imply that that's all people want out of
entertainment generally or MUDs specifically.

 
>> The question that I have been struggling with for over two years
>> now, is where is the balance?  The best conclusion that I could
>> come up with is that it is up to the admins and the style of MUD
>> they would prefer to host.  Both 'hide it all' and 'show it all'
>> solutions have drawbacks that directly affect gameplay and fun.

> A game that shows all information is geared for competition.  A game
> that obfuscates all internals permits both competition and
> cooperation, while catering to neither.  Quantification is the
> cannon fodder of competition.

Basketball doesn't show any internals (no one can reliably quantify a
player's "strength" or "ball-handling skills". They can only make
approximations at best.) and is awfully competitive, the recent
Laker's sweep not withstanding.

 
--matt

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