[MUD-Dev] PVP and perma-death

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

HRose <hrose at tiscali.it> writes:
> Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>> HRose wrote:

>>> I follow your thoughts but I still don't agree here. Competence
                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^
>>> and motivations come directly from the game.
        ^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> I don't see where you are disagreeing. Those examples are all
> about a responsibility of a designer and the newbie experience.

(See the arrows for what I am disagreeing with.)

There is no reason to believe that designers are not trying to make
their designs accessible. Although they make many many mistakes,
correcting those mistakes won't really remove the main
obstacle... IMO.

Yes, you can "teach" in a platform puzzle game, which often are
simple linear narratives... there you can introduce one game play
element per level. That is however to put the player on
rails... That is not a world. And, in my opinion, it doesn't provide
a good newbie experience for a virtual world. Newbies want to see
what the other players are doing, and what the world is all
about. I.e. they are in a socialization and grounding process, not
school. School is boring.

> of the game. Try to compare this with DAoC or EQ where you are
> forced to choose statistics that could screw your character right
> at the start.

RPG players tend to reroll their first character anyway, so it might
not be so bad as it sounds.

> *teach*. Teaching doesn't involve "dumbing down", it simply
> involves a slow and cautious approach that will turn a newbie into
> an expert.

Yes, but players still covers a wide range of competencies. Any kind
of fighting will quickly become too complicated for the novice. I
think it is better to let those who have the competencies enjoy
their knowledge, rather than have them wait till level
50... Although, for MUDs, learning the game often is the game...

> the game becoming ridiculous to be accessible. The responsibility
> of a designer is to give the player the competence. The designer
> gives you the tool you need.

In a MUD you learn from other players. The designer should make sure
that other players want to help you... However, if I have no
interest in those competencies then why on earth would I want to
listen to your "teaching"? It would be better for me to team up with
some dude who I enjoy to socialize with and who have those
competencies which I lack... when I need it.

I think you focus too much on a single player design.

> structures and skeletons. This is why I consider DAoC's PvP as a
> good idea to start with and experiment.

AO has that too. It wasn't sufficient as game content, but makes the
world seem a bit more alive. However, players tend to not be
enemies. They find that silly, they even object if the enemy attacks
just because they are the enemy... I.e. players matters, characters
and fiction is less important. (They probably don't object in DAoC
where they cannot chat.)

I don't really believe in pitting players up againts each other
based on some random selection process. It might work better if you
split players up in groups along real national boundaries, or
gender...

IMO the "conflict" between players and developers tend to be larger
than that between players on different fictional sides... *grins*

--
Ola - http://folk.uio.no/olag/
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev