[MUD-Dev] Understanding Simulation

[Ron Gabbard]

From: "Michael R. Estepp" <seronis at columbus.rr.com>
> From: "Damion Schubert" <damion at ninjaneering.com>

>> If the effect of a dynamic ecology is too random, then players
>> cannot see evident changes of your ecology, nor affect their
>> outcome.  If paths such as extinction are made impossible, then
>> the realistic world model that many MUD designers are aspiring to
>> create becomes fraught with unrealistic controls and
>> restrictions.  If players cannot affect the ecology of the world
>> around them to any meaningful degree, then the entire system
>> threatens to become an overly complex way of replicating systems
>> that could be done much simpler, offering much more value to the
>> imp than to the player.

> Its not overly complex and the players are not without the ability
> to effect the environment.  They're just not allowed to DESTROY
> the environment so that it will be around for next weeks batch of
> new players.

> A player doesnt have to make rabbits extinct in order to reduce
> their effectiveness.  If they are merely reduced to such small
> numbers that the birth rate is hindered the player just made a
> massive effect.  So if rabbit pelts are NEEDED for a certain item
> production then players will learn to not mass murder them.  You
> can even enrich this philosophy by having in-game books in the
> libraries of the world.  "The Art of Careful Rabbit Pelt
> Production".

> You could suppliment it with "The Art of Raising Rabbits" with
> in-game information on what you could do to feed rabbits and how
> much space to give them to encourage breeding.  Players might not
> have to get the "last remaining rabbits on Terra" in order to
> control production if you give them a means of breeding their OWN
> group they might be less tempted to wipe the rest off the face of
> the world.

This is the fun part of creating a simulated
environment... developing the supporting systems and game rules such
that breed after breed isn't driven to extinction.

You touched on one way of doing this through giving players
ownership of the resource, e.g., breeding their own rabbits.  This
is kind of what happened with the American buffalo (or "buffaloe" if
you're Dan Quayle).  They're now pretty much just another
domesticated herd animal rather than being a "free-range" beast that
once dominated the plains.  Their existence is guaranteed (assuming
no disease hits them) because their owners have a vested interest in
keeping a sufficient breeding stock.  However, turning a game-world
into one big zoo or animal farm where animals primarily exist in
pens may not be what is wanted depending on the supporting story and
overall theme.

Allowing ownership of the resource will avoid the Tragedy of the
Commons that will necessarily occur in the situation where you have
a "free resource" and that resource has value.  It's one big
Prisoner's Dilemma where you're pretty much guaranteed that players
will defect.

A second way of regulating harvest of a particular resource is to
make it not "needed".  That is, if an item is created by players
using rabbit pelts, design the trade skill system such that rabbit
pelts can be substituted with lynx pelts, fox pelts, etc.  As the
rabbit population becomes more and more depleted, the cost (in time)
of acquiring the incremental rabbit pelt will become higher and
higher as they are harder to find.  Players will switch to hunting
alternative animals for pelts giving the rabbits time to repopulate.

In a "real world" context, it's similar to the situation with oil.
Oil is a finite, non-renewable resource that has multiple uses from
fuel to plastics... a huge demand.  However, the world will never
run out of oil.  As the oil reserves shrink noticeably, the price
for the remaining oil will increase.  Those products that use oil
and have the lowest profit margin will be the first to switch to an
alternative, cheaper component.  This process will continue
throughout the life of the remaining reserve until only those
products with the highest profit on the conversion of oil will
continue to use oil as a component.  By the time the world's oil
reserves get to the last X million barrels, the cost of extracting
those last drops of oil will be so high that very, very few products
will able to absorb that cost.

The challenge of trying to create real world simulations in the
context of MMO's is that it can't be done half-way.  Most MMO
avatars are immortal and theoretically live forever as long as a
player continues to pay the monthly subscription charge.  They don't
have to eat or sleep.  They don't need shelter from the elements.
In other words, they're little gods and not humans, elves, or
wookies.  In addition, most games don't have a recurring in-game fee
that forces players to "go to work" to support themselves.  Thus,
they're little gods on vacation with an infinite hunger to consume
content.  Placing little gods in a realistic simulation has some
serious issues.

It's difficult to create a realistic simulation when one component
of the system (the avatars) have very few constraints and are in
unlimited supply.  If you go to any environmental system and make
the creature at the top of the food chain in unlimited supply with
an unlimited "hunger" and that ecosystem will have serious problems.
Add the fact that the creature is immortal and you end up with
hordes of unhappy "starving" avatars roaming around looking for
anything to hunt, competing strongly with the other avatars for any
prey that happens to be around... until they quit the game.  In
short, creating a simulated environment is a great challenge.
However, it has to be integrated with the other game systems (such
as trade skills, the economy, character skill
development/progression, etc.) such that the finite can support the
infinite.

THAT'S the real fun part.

Cheers,

Ron








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