[MUD-Dev] Morphable worlds, Reset based systems revisited

[brian hook]

Ola said:

> I don't know. It is easier for newbies to get into the system if
> everybody else are "newbies".

It is?  I learn more from a "master" than I do from another student.

Once again, if you're fundamentally assuming a power advancement
universe, then sure, some newbies may feel better that they're
starting at the same point.

But at that point, you're not making a world, you're making a race
to the finish line.  You can't have a persistent world where
EVERYONE starts on a level playing field.  Someone who joins 4 weeks
later may feel that they're at a complete disadvantage.  Someone who
started at the beginning may get upset/frustrated they can't devote
16 hours/day to playing the game.

So, once again, if you are fundamentally assuming a power
advancement model of gratification, then this might be true, but
even then, I'm not convinced.

> Politics without interference tends to lead to "monopolies" of
> some sort.

You can still "interfere" to keep things balanced.  If you have a
game that pits city-states or realms against each other, you can
have power shifts in the struggle, but you can also put in safe
guards to prevent minority states from being crushed into rubble.

You don't need to reset the world just to "fix" these problems.

>> Everyone being "at your own level" does provide more
>> opportunities for socializing, but at the same time it's a pretty
>> strong indicator that you're already on a level treadmill
>> somewhere.
 
> Hmm... not convinced! :)

What's not to be convinced?  If everyone is worried about a level
playing field, then they're focused on achievement in terms of a
measure of tangible power.  That's basically a level/skill/power
treadmill.
 
> Yes, it is true that this applies most to achievment and
> exploration, but then I think most, and perhaps all, players want
> to do that!

There are different definitions of achievement and exploration, and
it only muddies the discussion when the two are confused.

When I say that reset/relaunch is there to appease achievers, I mean
people that are interested in the power treadmill.  Of course most
people enjoy exploration and achievement, but NOT necessarily in the
form of "I found a new mountain" or "I have a better sword".  In the
context of _people_, not _characters_, achievement and exploration
can mean very many things.

In the context of games, and specifically what I was discussing,
achievement was specifically referred to advancement of power.  I'm
not sold that 100% of players are looking for this and feel they're
directly competing against other players.

> Yes, but adding content doesn't make the world more attractive to
> newbies. It is counter productive in that respect.

100% disagreement.  Adding new content doesn't affect newbies one
way or another, because their "horizon" is far enough that they
can't tell if the next continent is 1 mile away or 100 miles away.

To say new content is counter productive is baffling to me.  It
doesn't affect newbies in any way.

> On the other hand, people buy new games all the time and I doubt
> they go back to their old games too often.

Straw man.  People go back to their old _persistent_ games all the
time.  Look at UO, EQ, etc.  They go back to their old _fun_ games
all the time.  If a game is about consuming content, then they don't
revisit it necessarily unless they have other strong reasons (social
bonds) to do so.

> Solving a quest cooperatively with another player is a cathalyst
> for social bonding! Conquering the world with your fellow players
> is rewarding. Basically, feeling progress and mastery through
> cooperation is a very rewarding activity.

Sure...and?

> the physical world. I want a world which supports creativity,
> intellectual activity and progress, not sports and agility.

That's funny, because most achievement oriented MUDs basically
reward patience and ability to suffer through tedium.  Frankly, I'm
far more impressed with the level of skill necessary to play CS than
I am the level of "skill" to play Everquest.
 
> *shrug* I play games as art. If there is not a world or roleplay,
> I will loose interest real fast. I'd have more fun playing devil's
> advocate on a mailinglist!

Hey, great, but that's not addressing my point -- my point is that
CounterStrike and BF1942 and Quake are examples of multiplayer games
where you don't have to provide new content all the time in order to
keep players interested.

-Hook



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