[MUD-Dev] Mass customization in MM***s

[Paul]

From: John Robert Arras <johna at wam.umd.edu>
> On Sun, Jul 14 Ron Gabbard wrote:

>> players are not broken...  game systems just don't have the
>> sufficient checks, balances, and flexibility to deter
>> 'anti-social' behavior.  Is it absolutely necessary to draw the
>> box of possible player actions so small that players are left
>> with very few ways in which to interact with each other in order
>> to prevent 'anti-social' behavior or can tools for checks and
>> balances be included in the system such that there is a
>> player-driven penalty for anti-social behavior?  Can players be
>> given the responsibility for adhering to social norms if they are
>> also given the means to be held accountable for their actions?

> My problem is giving players institutionalized positions of power.
> For example, making a player the "mayor" of a city is a bad idea
> IMO. I don't trust players who are given that kind of
> institutional power for whatever reason. If players want to earn
> points and then use those points to influence the direction of the
> city, that's fine. It's just that singling out players for special
> treatment and giving them official titles that they can use to
> lord over other playesr is bad.

Isn't this highly dependant upon implementation, though?  I mean, if
a mayor can lord his position over other players then wouldn't that
mean that you haven't hit Ron's mark where players can be held
accountable for their actions?

When you talk about making a player the mayor of a city, who is
doing the making?  Is this a developer thing or a player thing?
Does time=experience points='level to mayor' like in many current
games, or are we talking about mayors being elected to the position
by citizens of the town, as we would intuitively understand this to
work in the non-virtual world?

Can we not design a game where the players can hold the mayor
accountable for his actions?  I can think of a couple of ways to do
this off the top of my head.

  1.  Mayors are elected.  If you try to use strongarm tactics or
  lord you position over your constituents, you might just be
  shooting yourself in the political foot.

  2.  The power of a position is somewhat dependant upon population.
  If players don't like living in your town, they may decide to go
  elsewhere.  If enough players leave, your town might slip back to
  being merely a village.  Since only towns have a mayor, you would
  also lose a 'level' personally and be relegated to be the Village
  Headman.  As a village, you don't draw the same caliber of NPC
  trainers as you did when you were a town.  You also are not able
  to order the construction of many of the city structures that help
  make community life advantageous.

If we can create more symbiotic relationships so that the community
needs its leaders and the leaders need the community, I think that
player run governments complete with governmental positions like
mayors can be a wonderful thing for an MMORPG.  There need to be
checks and balances so that institutional power comes with
accountability, but I would personally prefer a system with that
kind of freedom and flexibility over a theocracy run by an
overworked and overwrought development team; entirely too human to
be gods.

--Phinehas

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