[MUD-Dev] Player Justice

[Paul Schwanz]

Amanda Walker wrote:
> On Apr 9, 2004, at 6:36 PM, Paul Schwanz wrote:

>> I believe there is an untapped market of gamers who are tired of
>> having games sanitized of everything that might threaten what a
>> vocal few feel they are entitled to--a market who feels
>> frustrated over the designer's insistence that nothing can really
>> matter very much in their game, because a vocal few do not have
>> the maturity to handle being on the losing side of something that
>> does matter.

> I think there is an untapped market of gamers for whom danger is
> not a primary goal.

Indeed.  And count me among them.  My primary goals have more to do
with the following:

  "...it is an opportunity for a community leader to start a
  campaign.  It is an opportunity for politics and rivalry.  It is
  an opportunity for a game story that players will care more about
  than they've ever cared about the GCW (unless the wiley designer
  figures out how to leverage the situation and build it into the
  GCW story arc).  It is an opportunity for community members to
  band together while striving for a common goal."

I'd like to see compelling gameplay, but I don't want danger for
danger's sake.  Neither do I want the sort of opportunities
described above sanitized out of the game in the mistaken pursuit of
gameplay where players cannot lose anything.  I espeicially don't
want to see this done as a knee-jerk reaction to vocal players with
a design-fostered sense of entitlement complaining about losing this
or that.

> In fact, according to recent surveys that have been quoted here on
> mud-dev, the largest segment of online gaming is middle aged
> adults playing *card and puzzle games*.  Think really hard about
> that for a moment.  Not 3D texture mapped extravaganzas.  Dinky
> little games whipped together with Flash and Python.

Does a game have to be designed as either compelling or
low-involvement?  Personally, I enjoy both styles of play.  I like
to stay connected via mental nudges

  http://www.kanga.nu/archives/MUD-Dev-L/2001Q3/msg00825.php

during those times that I'm too busy with work of family to set
aside a larger chunk of time, but through episodic play

  http://www.kanga.nu/archives/MUD-Dev-L/2002Q4/msg00349.php

I also like to immerse myself in something that is interesting when
I do have additional time to put towards interactive entertainment.
When I asked recently on this list, "Do players enjoy farming?"

  http://www.kanga.nu/archives/MUD-Dev-L/2004Q1/msg00073.php

I did so with the opinion that, yes, they do.  However, that isn't
to say that they don't enjoy exciting periods of conflict, tension,
or danger.  I believe that the art of game design is not in the
pain, pleasure, toil, peace, or rest; nor is it in the danger or the
farming.  I believe that the art of game design isn't in any
particular element, but in the proper mixing and presentation of all
of these elements.

> Then take a look at Second Life.  No levels, no combat except in
> designated zones (and no side effects if you get "killed" even
> there, beyond getting teleported home).  There are people paying
> much more per month in real $ than Sony could ever dream of
> charging for Everquest or SWG--people spending hours building and
> tweaking player-generated content (in fact, all content is
> player-generated beyond the basic landscape, and even that is
> player-generated in older areas).  It's by far the most MUD-like
> of the current crop of commercial MMO offerings.

Not sure why, but Second Life doesn't sound the least bit
interesting to me as a game space in which I'd want to immerse
myself.  :p

> Not everyone is looking for a treadmill they can "win".

I'm not looking for a treadmill at all.  On the other hand, I'm not
sure that Tears for Fears got it completely wrong when they sang,
"Everybody wants to rule the world."  :)

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