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

[Ted L. Chen]

Shren writes:
> Ted writes

>> While I do agree that player-named places can propogate, I'm not
>> convinced anything that is so closely attached to a single player
>> (i.e. their name) can.  That is, the usual way for such a name to
>> be formed is through a tight clique.  Such a clique rarely
>> interacts with other people in the same way.  Just as it happens
>> in RL.  "Bubba's Fiasco" (the mexican resturant where Bubba had
>> food poisoning and barfed on the waitress) might have meaning to
>> one set of my friends, but it would have far less effect and
>> sticking power in my other set of friends who didn't know Bubba.

> I live, IRL, in a world full of things named after people.  Just
> because the names are remote doesn't mean they arn't
> culture-enhancing.

Hmm.. I stand corrected.  But it bears a little bit more thinking as
to why "Bubba's Fiasco" seems much less credulous as something that
would be widely accepted.  Could it be a combination of:

  a) Bubba is still alive.

  b) People not in the Bubba's fold don't see Bubba as any influence
  in their lives (or the society to which they belong).

  c) Bubba did not mount a good enough advertising campaign.

  d) It lacks a monument.

These are by no means exhaustive nor necessarily checkpoints that
are required in order for something to become ingrained in the
general culture.

I think players in MOGs might forgo the requirement that the person
they turn into legend be dead. ;) The person being influential might
be harder to come by in the current crop of MOGs.  If that influence
is through some achievement by in-game mechanics, then they might
meet even hard resistance because "it's no big deal because everyone
COULD do it."  Whether everyone else actually does accomplish it is
inconsequential.  So that leaves out-of-game community efforts.  I'd
buy that things could be named after people who went
above-and-beyond the call of duty.  It's rare though, and it's
because of the rarity that I believe it.

The last two are said tongue in cheek, but might actually be
something to think about if you want to see things named after
individual players widely accepted.

> In a sufficiently graphical game, a sword would look like a sword
> and swing like a sword, and thus you might be likely to call it a
> longsword.

Ah, but if I didn't know what a "longsword" was, and you mentioned
it in a discussion, then we'd have to go through the entire
description in order to figure out that the thing I've been using
was a "longsword" after all, and not just a simple sword,
shortsword, broadsword, or twizzlestick.  Longsword is simple enough
however for me to figure it out by common sense.

The more exotic we go, the less likely people would already know the
established category name for that thing.  If the game has items not
based on reality or history, then no established names would exist
at all.

So, sticking a general name on that item, either on the item itself
or at the time of purchase would help people communicate (without
which, community doesn't form).  Mind you, I'm not suggesting you
necessarily give specific brand names, but at least give something
with which people could commonly refer to without ever having to use
the word "thingy" in dialogue.

TLC


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