[MUD-Dev] Cheating in the world

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

"Damion Schubert" <ubiq at zenofdesign.com> writes:

> The crux of your argument appears to be that MUDs are worlds and
> not games.  All MUDs and MMOs are some combination of world, game
> and community, and the most successful games are a fairly equal
> combination of all three.

Yes, or rather, I argue that the unique characteristics of MUDs are
related to the world and not the game, and that the game can get in
the way if the MUD is not treated as a world. I.e. if you need to
know the rules of the game before visiting the world, it really is a
game and not a world. I am in other words trying to draw a line
between games with a world slapped on top of it and a carefully
crafted world with games in them. I am not saying it is easy to make
MUDs...

I also see an increasing need to define what the distinguishing
characteristics of a MUD are as more and more UN-MUD like multi user
game designs informed by single user game approaches flood the
market. I am not at all convinced that knowledge from one domain
(game) will benefit the other domain (world). Basically I think the
"world" is going to suffer. And I don't see the 3D homepage spaces
as viable alternatives either... I.e. they are something completely
different. (rhetorically speaking)

> When thinking about 'world', one of the cornerstones of the
> 'world' component of online gaming is immersion.  When players
> cheat, the immersion shatters, and players are snapped out of the
> 'world'.

Especially if they are quite confident that they know the rules. ;-)

> Case in point: UO at launch was probably the most 'world'-like of
> all of commercial MMOs that launched.  Much of the cheating was
> because of simplistic systems designed specifically to create a
> virtual world without thinking of their impact on 'game' or
> 'community'. But even the most ardent fans of the virtual world
> could not mentally adapt or put up with exploiters building
> staircases out of spoons to climb into the top windows of their
> opponents houses to loot them from the inside.

Why is this an exploit? That suggests that it was a flawed design,
doesn't it? What makes the design flawed? That you can climb on
spoons or that somebody had a burglar visiting? If it was the latter
then this really is just an example of the game getting in the way
of the world IMO.

> If the management of UO hadn't had a change of heart and started
> coming down on cheaters hard, everyone would have fled, and then

Well, the point is, I don't understand why climbing on spoons is
cheating. To me, that is depth.

If it is a world, the management of UO shouldn't be of any concern
to me. I am not going to walk around in a world and ask myself "Hmm,
wonder if the management of UO would disapprove of this or
that?". It seems perfectly reasonable that if the physics of the
world allows me to innovate, I should very well benefit from it.

  (I'll make an exception for interface exploits that are based on
  range-checks etc as that may not be part of the world. Although
  some players might feel it is.)

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