[MUD-Dev] What's in the lack of a name?

[shren]

On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Rayzam wrote:
> From: "shren" <shren at io.com>
 
> What's in the lack of a name? The lack of a world. The examples
> given above is great for the birth of a world, and that'd be a
> great genre not yet well developed. I can see the Sims Online
> being like that. Snag a piece of virtual real estate, build up
> houses or businesses or whatnot, and name both the area and the
> individuals. That builds community.
 
> However, in a fantasy realm, I'd take that view as the world not
> seeming as real to me. If I'm dropped into a world where there
> were those before me, the many NPCs, I'd expect from my own real
> life experiences that populated areas would be named. I'd even
> want names for the Place Where the Goblins Live. NPCs should refer
> to things by names. These names should be consistent, unless
> there's a reason not to be, i.e. a place having a different name
> for the Elves versus the Humans. But within that context, the
> names are still constant. Names tie into backstory. They tie into
> making the world real. The lack of names for places is related to
> those places being previously unknown or forgotten.

We're going to just have to agree to disagree here.  The NPCs in the
various games I've played have had the character depth of vending
machines, and the backstory always seems to have little to no effect
on the game as it is.  There always seems to be a huge disjunct
between the world the way the designers try to convince you it
happened and the way things are now.

So, I get no immersion from the backstory at all (for me the
beginning of time on any mud is game launch, not when some backstory
says time started), and only limited immersion from the names
designers give places.

That's probably just me.  

> Now that's for locations. And players can rename them for their
> own usage as they see fit. But unless the rest of the game world
> [NPCs] start using the same vernacular, then you haven't really
> differentiated between having names and not having names.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  Players can name things
whatever they want - it's generally pointless if the game names it
otherwise.

I've never encountered an NPC smart enough to be using vernacular of
any sort in a long time.  They always seem to be generic, cut from
the same mold, and teaching them to differentiate based on names
would just be unnecessary work.

> When it comes to items, I like the concept of giving most things
> generic names, but having them nameable by players. The caveat is
> that all of them will be named, just because they can be, and
> because it's cooler that way.  And that detracts from Named items
> really being special.

You seem firmly nestled into the status quo.  That's fine - I don't
demand that you change, only ask you to consider the alternative.
Why should an item have a built-in name?


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