[MUD-Dev] ghost mode

[Daniel.Harman at barclayscapital.com]

From: Tess Lowe [mailto:tess at soulsong.org.uk]

> If you have a beautiful virtual world, why not give people the
> freedom to move around it at will, if it doesnt physically
> interfere with the achievers? Make it a premium feature if you
> like. I'll pay extra if you let me fly around invisibly, sit on a
> cloud and chat, while watching the uberguilds try to take out
> whatever content you've added to their totem pole. After all, do
> these achievers play for content, or do they play to win the game,
> get the loot and their friends' respect and prove their skill?
> Will the achievers really care if a bunch of socialisers can hang
> around invisibly and watch them 0wn?

Well ok, but would you want to sit on a cloud in a world where
everyone was doing the same thing as you? If so, then 'There' etc
are the games for it.  If you can find a way to put it into an
advancement based game without compromising the mechanics I'd love
to know it.

Do you really even want what you are asking for, would it hold your
interest for more than a week? If not, then as a developer I
wouldn't choose to deploy resources in servicing your desire.

I understand your reluctance to get onto a treadmill. I've stopped
playing MMOs myself because I've lost all tolerance too. I just
don't see any way of making a game compelling if you give the
players every facet of gameplay as soon as they instantiate the
character. Even single player games keep things back as a reward,
and they don't have anything like the content problems that MMOs do!

> I dont have the time or inclination to do the "grunt work"
> required to see your content, nor do I see why I should. Grunt
> work is for people with no life.

Well ok, but your 'grunt work' is someone elses fun. I'm sure there
are plenty of players who'd find sitting on a cloud fairly tedious
too. There are a variety of playstyles, and none of them are
invalid. My point though, is that whilst they are not invalid they
are often mutually incompatible.  SWG is a fine example as they have
compromised the 'loot' aspect of 'loot & level' to improve the lot
of the crafters. To ensure the crafters have a market, you don't get
exciting semi-random rewards when you kill things. A nice idea for
the crafters, but as a player who quite likes combat I found I had
no incentive to hunt at all. You can level in combat skills so that
you have more combat skills so that you can continue to level in
combat skills.  For me, there is precious little reward in watching
an xp bar grow for its own sake. Don't get me wrong, I admire them
for trying this approach, after all I don't presume to consider my
playstyle to be superior, but for me it falls flat.

As Raph alluded to in his other post, its human nature to strive for
achievement. I do it in games as I do in real life. Despite
advancement mechanics in games often being called treadmills, I
don't believe it's a fair criticism. Each point along the
advancement curve is a destination, although its human nature to
forget that and look at the next one when you get there. It's the
games that don't have any advancement that are treadmills - they
don't take you or let you go anywhere. There can't be that many
people who just want a pretty chat room? If it's the chat that's the
compelling content, then it would be folly to invest millions in a
pretty 3d front end for IRC & message boards!

The relationships I've built in these games has been through
achieving with people. The adversity & common interests that brought
us together, and its only after a while that you start to know the
person behind the character.

> Here's an alternative:- three ways to unlock content and/or make
> it easy to access - why not use all of them? Text MUDs already do
> this.

>   1) grunt work over time.

>   2) player skill

>   3) paying a premium

> I dont have time for (1), but I'm happy to work at (2) or (3). Do
> you want my money?

Yes but not at the expense of people who are likely to stick around
for longer.

>> The last thing you want is people being able to see and do
>> everything as soon as they first log in. Its hardly likely to
>> prolong subscription revenue is it?

> It depends on why we're playing, and it depends on whether content
> spoilers end people's enjoyment of your game.

But my point is that you won't be playing if everything is handed to
you on a plate. Do you honestly think the players of DAoC, Lineage,
EQ, SWG et al.  would keep playing if the axis of achievement were
removed? Would you want to sit on a cloud in any of these worlds if
all the people achieving had left and there wasn't anything
interesting left to watch?

> pps I like the look of There, hopefully they'll let me try
> it. Second Life is just ugly. I could fly, which was nice,
> but... ugh.

Ok, you've just demonstrated you are a gfx junkie. That's
problematic for a game which intends to have a >3 year liftetime!
I'd much rather keep you interested with a controlled dissemination
of content.

I know my post might make me sound like a bit of a hard core DIKU
style guy.  I'm not, but I firmly disagree with this monty haul
approach to game design that's being espoused.

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