[MUD-Dev] Community?

[Brian Thyer]

Erik Bethke wrote:

> 250?  9-11? 10,000?  Counter-strike?

> Community?

> These are all slippery ideas.

> What is community?  What are the relationships we maintain on a
> daily basis?  Online/Offline.

> How does it matter that I game with 20 people or I counter strike
> with millions - in a semantic sense.  JC mentioned that there are
> strong papers and references that can pin point this discussion
> down, but I don't know what the point is.

> Before argueing more and more about whether or not community
> breaks down at 250 or 10,000 or even what we mean by community (in
> order to better define this point) - we should get back to what
> the question is in the first place.

I think any group of people centered around an idea is a community.

40,000 people who play the same game are a community.  100 people
who share a message board are a community.  You and your neighbor
who get together to chat and talk about your street once a month are
a community.

I guess another way to look at it, using another word you used, is
that a community is a collection of relationships based around a
single idea.

I don't think communities "break down" as the numbers get larger.
Rather, they splinter off into more, specific communities.  I may be
a part of a community for this MMO I play, but more specifically I'm
a part of the "Warrior" and "Blacksmith" and "<Insert Guild Name
Here>" community.

> And I think I lost it.

> The question is something about how future MMO game design
> interacts with user counts and whether or not instancing is a
> "valid" strategy going forward or whether or not everyone needs to
> be in the same world for the MMO to truly earn its name.  Right?
> Is that the question?

I'm not entirely sure (or maybe the word is "clear") how the
interaction between player and MMO affects the community, unless
you're trying to create a specific kind.  All games will develop
communities.  Everquest has the ability to talk to many other
players both in the game and outside (message boards).  But at the
same rate, Diablo II a non persistent non M.M. game has the ability
for a community, via the chat rooms message boards and web pages
like the Arreat Summit (sp?).

If the game is popular communities will form.  If players can't form
such a community in game, through game mechanics, they will seek
other methods.  Official web pages and forums.  Should those means
not exist they'll seek even other alternative sources, such as the
"Planet <Blank>" web pages.

> We have a problem in that bluntly speaking the graphics technology
> now exceeds our ability to feed the demon.  Seemless worlds that
> are beautifully detailed to the degree that technology allows is
> now past the budgets of almost all - if not all players now.

> Instancing allows for a greater concentration of assets in a
> smaller space to crank up the quality level of the content (among
> other advantages).  Perhaps it would be better if we thought less
> rigidly between the choices of instance vs. seemless and thought
> more about actual gameplay.

> I for one am tired of the level grind.  I am somewhat hopeful
> about WoW, but it seems like the big guys are stuck in a rut about
> having a character glide on a 2D plan and clicking on various
> bunny rabbits until the die.  Sometimes the bunnies wear costumes
> - wow.  Now A Tale in the Desert is new and different and many of
> the risk-taking indies are doing something new, but I think the
> discussion on instancing vs.  non-instancing is just a small part
> of the question we must answer in order to advance games.

I guess my question/confusion comes in here, what does the community
have to do with the level grind?  Are you analyzing how communities
and in game mechanics tend to split off / separate?  Are you trying
to find a way to look at integrating the two?

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