[Meta] Re: [MUD-Dev] Future of MMOGs

[amanda at alfar.com]

"Ted L. Chen" <tedlchen at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Not trying to be too argumentative here, but I'm not convinced
> that prefab tools will really be a big sticking point in the
> future of MOGs (graphical ones - since we're talking about
> VRML/NWN).  The analogy with the WWW is uneven at best because the
> web content exists primarily on a text level.  Layout programs
> like Frontpage or Dreamweaver are just glorified text editors that
> insert transparent HMTL between the content.

Certainly.  On the other hand, they do get people started.  UO, the
Sims, and so on show how much fun people can have (and how ingenious
they can be) with even a rudimentary prefab-based editing facility.
Sure, prefab-based content tends to look similar.  And people create
content with these systems who wouldn't touch a conventional level
editor, much less a commercial CAD system.

There's an abstraction scale, with things like UO and the Sims being
fairly high on it, and AutoCAD or Maya being very low on it.  The
fact that I personally might prefer the latter doesn't mean I think
it's the best way to help people create their own content and tell
their own stories in a game (though I must say, I think that UT
2003's ability to use Maya Personal Learning Edition as a content
creation tool was a stroke of genius).

> Text, as many on this list know, is abundant and is cheap.  What
> we have is about 26 base units, configurable in an almost
> limitless way (of which we probably know at least 2000 very well),
> which are then combined into the idioms.

Indeed--but most people have only a very basic command of those
tools.  Writing well is hard.  There's a lot of really bad writing
out there.

> You can take a look at the downloads sections of The Sims or the
> architecture buildings of the SimCity sites to see how limiting
> such tools have on the creative aspects.

Yes and no.  I see a lot of stuff that looks the same, but I also
see a lot of people creating stuff with the tools that wouldn't have
bothered if they'd had to use AutoCAD.  I am very interested in
bridging the gap between "UO house owner" and "civil engineer".

Using the WWW as an example, services like AOL and software like "My
Home Page Builder" let people build web pages that would not have
done so if they'd had to learn HTML first.  And then once they've
done that, they get interested in customizing things so that their
page doesn't look like everyone else's based on template #3.

> The problem isn't really with the use of editors though, its with
> the level of control they give the users.  The prefab editors I've
> seen so far would describe my computer desk as a wooden table, but
> it would continue on and list the papers, penciles, keyboard, and
> all manner of stuff that's on it right now.  It frees me from
> having to do that detail yes, but then your computer desk would
> look exactly like mine, which is very jarring.

Indeed.  Again, I'll use the WWW analogy.  If the prefabs are
implemented as a library of templates you can instantiate, much the
way that WWW editors implement their various prefab styles, you end
up with the very useful "create and tweak" pattern, which has a much
faster learning curve than "create from scratch".  Selecting desk
#2, dinking it open and throwing out the desk blotter, then dragging
in a minitower computer, adjusting its position and clicking "save"
remains more abstract (and much easier) that building it up from
nothing.

I think it's possible to let people create interesting 3D content
without requiring them to have an artist's eye or draftsman's hand.

> On the other hand, why worry too much about it?  It takes us all
> approximately ten years to be reasonably proficient at words to
> write a rambling diatribe like I just did above.  One to three of
> which were spent just learning how to use the base letters.  Why
> do we expect people to create graphical representations of towns
> overnight without learning the basic principles of 3d geometry?

I don't.  I *do* want them to be able to create content and context
that are "theirs", even if their first few efforts look like
everyone else's, or downright silly.

We don't learn to write by studying it in advance--we learn it *by
writing*.  As we go, study can help us write more effectively or
proficiently, but by that point we're already writing.

The same is true for all creative endeavor.  I want to give people
the virtual equivalent of Lego bricks, or Erector sets, or Meccano,
or whatever.  I want to let them put on puppet shows to get them
interested in stage design.  I want to get graphical MMO games out
of the mode where all of the visuals are produced by professionals
and the players end up interacting in the ultimate prefab--a static,
teflon coated world that none of their actions can affect.

Put more bluntly--I want to help people create bad content.  Every
artist has a lot of Bad Art to work out of their system before they
start mastering their medium.

Amanda Walker

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