[MUD-Dev] narrative

[Bruce Mitchener]

Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Bruce Mitchener
>>Brandon J. Van Every wrote:

>>> Look, bottom line this.  Can any of these theory R&D guys
>>> actually write?  Have they ever produced anything remotely
>>> resembling a good story, let alone a good story with their
>>> research tools?  Attempts at frameworks can be impressive, for
>>> instance I have respect for what Chris Crawford has attempted to
>>> do with the Erasmatron.  However, the bottom line is: no
>>> product.  Why are we listening to researchers who have not
>>> proven that they are also good writers?

>> If you'd read those papers, would you still be asking this?  Why
>> not read the works and then argue based upon the merits of the
>> works, rather than an abstract family of objections,

> Because frankly, I've got a lot of other things to do than worry
> about pie in the sky MUD storywriting tool theory.  I'm subscribed
> to the "idrama" mailing list, I almost did an Erasmatron project
> with Chris Crawford last summer, I've heard buckets of stuff from
> people trying to solve these kinds of problems and the bottom line
> is, where's the excellent writing to show for all this engineering
> effort?  I'll read the papers if they sound like they're worth my
> time.
 
> You've read the papers, this is your presentation, give me the
> bottom line.  Can these R&D guys also write well, or not?  Have
> you read their writing, or not?  How good was it compared to other
> things you've read, books and so forth?  And what books do you
> like, what's your personal taste in writing?
 
> If the R&D guys themselves don't write, do they have a talented
> writer deeply inculcated in the tool design process, or not?  Same
> questions: have you read the writers' results, are they good?
> Compared to what?

Brandon,

Unlike writing fiction, which you claim to do, where the fiction is
directed at an audience and isn't a dialogue with that audience,
writing on a mailing list (much like participating in an adventure
in a multi-player game is a two-way interaction between multiple
people.

What this means for you is that usually, when someone asks questions
of you on the list, it isn't appropriate to just ignore them and
decide to continue your one-way broadcast.

As a reminder, I'd asked this in the email that you'd responded to:

   Given a larger scale game with a limited staff size (1% or
   less of player base), how would you provide the players and
   the game with enough content and stories?  This content and
   stories should include quests or missions that are suitable
   for small (1-2) groups of participants up to larger groups
   (say, 100 people, possibly in separate groups, on differing
   timelines).  You'll not be running those missions/quests
   manually in all cases, so some aspects of running them will
   either need to be automated, or fall out of some other process
   running the world.

   I'm guessing from what you'd said that your experience (and
   interest) is with the small scale games where you can customize
   the experience (and without worrying about the commercial
   aspects/costs) for very few players.  My interests are quite
   different and at the other end of things.  Your feelings can
   be fine and non-damaging at the low-end of the population
   scale.  But, they simply don't work for even decent sized
   MUDs, much less something larger, if we want to increase
   the depth of the world and the player's involvement and
   interaction with that world.

I look forward to seeing a dialogue.

Cheers,

  - Bruce


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