[MUD-Dev] Casual Crowd vs.Time Rich Crowd [was: Time Debt]

[Koster, Raph]

Matthew Dobervich wrote:
> Raph Koster Replied:
>> Hrose Wrote:

>>>   I have many design ideas on how to solve the problem about
>>>   "Casual Crowd vs.Time Rich Crowd" and they are along the lines
>>>   of creating different structures inside the game where
>>>   different players have different roles and goals. Where casual
>>>   players have a specific role and goal and where time rich
>>>   crowds have another. And the *key* is about giving them
>>>   different roles but making they play *together* with the same
>>>   general goal.

>> The difficulty here is that is the roles have contributions to
>> the goal inversely proportionate to the time investment required,
>> that people will start to cross the roles in search of maximum
>> return. The time-rich players will take on the casual roles
>> because they offer greater reward for time invested. And if the
>> casual roles do NOT offer greater reward for time invested, then
>> they will not feel rewarding to the casual players either, who
>> will compare themselves to the time-rich players and cry foul.

> I think he has a point here, and I think you missed it.  Would you
> have had the same response if he had said "two different games"
> instead of "two different roles inside>the< game"?

If you mean by "two different games" two different servers you log
into, then no, I would not have the same response. If, however, you
mean embedded experiences within the same game where there is one
shared goal or metric, then I think my point stands.

> Have you ever played Harvest Moon?  This is a game where you spend
> almost all your time managing the daily aspects of running a farm.
> If it's a sunny day, you get up and feed your animals, then water
> your crops.  If you have time maybe you do some weeding, or till
> some more ground for more crops.  Oh, it's raining today.  Great,
> I have time to go into "town", sell some crops and advance the RPG
> meta-game.

Yep. This is not at all dissimilar to what the economic game already
does in SWG, what the crafting game already did in UO, what the PvP
game did in UO (and in fact does in a wide assortment of games, at
this point). The issue is that even though advancement and
achievement on that particular axis is measured on its own scale,
the meta-game (well, one of them, anyway) is still measured in
currency. In other words, you can have a hundred different
mechanics, each with their own ladders to climb, but as long as
there is one common metric against which all can be measured, you
will still get the effect I described:

  Players who are time-rich will pick the most efficient mechanic to
  climb the ladder of the most general metric.

  It will not matter if this mechanic is fun to them, or if they are
  the target audience.

If you make the casual mechanic "fair" in that it accumulates the
meta-metric at a comparable net rate of real time (e.g., the casual
basketweaving game intended to be played for fifteen minutes at a
time, in one week earns you gold comparable to the hardcore
blacksmithying that takes hours), then they will see that if played
*as if it were a hardcore mechanic* that it will be
disproportionately rewarding. And that is what they will do
(everyone will grind basketweaving for hours at a time).

And if it's not rewarding (basketweaving nets you 15 minutes worth
of gold, and blacksmithying nets you hours worth of gold) then those
who embrace basketweaving will feel left out of the rat race and
many will abandon it.

This is not a hypothetical.

> Image this "mini-game" set inside a world where people are running
> around with swords killing monsters.

> Is one clearly "greater reward for time invested"?  Both ask
> different thinks of the player, both offer the player different
> rewards.

Until the moment when the guys killing monsters go back to town and
compare their haul of loot with the loot received by the guy who
farmed the crops. At that point, the farming and the killing are
revealed not as alternate advancement ladders (though tthey are
alternate playstyles) but as alternate means to an end: climbing the
meta-ladder of wealth.

In SWG, the current result is actually that the farmers have WAY WAY
WAY more money. Which has led to cute inverted results where due to
a recent change, the hack n slashers are all upset that they cannot
run shops as easily as they did before (and therefore tap into that
playstyle).

> Current MMOs are amusement parks with one REALLY GREAT RIDE!  And
> maybe a halfway decent sideshow or two.  We need to build Disney
> World, where everybody can find SOMETHING to entertain themselves
> with, even if they don't like space mountain.

Frankly, I think we have made major progress towards that
already. The underlying issue remains. Humans seek status in a
hierarchy. If you want to avoid that, you have to give them
orthogonal hierarchies. "Working towards the same goal" does not do
that in and of itself, and in fact pushes in the opposite direction.

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