[MUD-Dev] Cognitively Interesting Combat (was Better Combat)

[Paolo Piselli]

David-

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  I'm going to break up my response
into a few posts to keep things readable.

First I'd like to make explicit the assumptions that I am making.  I
am assuming that making combat "better" means making it more
interesting to the human participants.  I am assuming that through
cognitive analysis of the combat "task" we can arrive at a
reasonable model of what is going on inside the human player's head.
I am assuming that making combat more interesting amounts to
modifying the combat task such that it places more demands on the
player.

It is my position that cognitive analysis is part of the future of
making a *science* of game design. Don't get me wrong - there will
always be art to it - but as competing games are less able to wow
players with feats of engineering, the player experience will be the
deciding factor as to which games sell, thus it is worthy of serious
study.

I am also not arguing against treadmills and timesinks.  I do not
have the figures, but it seems highly evident that a player's time
investment and perception of achievement is causally connected to
their loyalty as a customer.  Rather, what I propose is that if the
player must spend hundreds of hours in the game, lets try to make
them as interesting hours as possible.  I believe that making the
combat experience (or non-combat for that matter) more cognitively
engaging is a relatively inexpensive way of increasing player
interest when compared to other methods (such as constantly
generating additional content).

Ok, quoted responses are forthcoming...

-Paolo

=====
Paolo Piselli
ppiselli at yahoo.com
www.piselli.com , www.bestcoastswing.com
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev