[MUD-Dev2] [DESIGN] MMO's are for Newbies

[Richard A. Bartle]

On 25 September 2006, John Buehler wrote:

>Is the classic Star Trek holodeck style experience "virtual" enough?  Where
>is the line drawn between reality and virtual?
        Well there are many differences between the virtual and the real.
In the virtual, I can do things that I am physically incapable of in the
real, for example.
        You said you got the impression that I wanted to walk around
Middle Earth for real. No I don't. I want a Middle Earth that allows
people to do things beyond the limits of what they can do in reality;
otherwise, it wouldn't be Middle Earth. Also, I don't want to wander
round it, I want to create it; I'm a designer, not a player.

>So ultimately, everyone wants their own "right amount of realism" to
>facilitate an experience that they find entertaining.
        This may be correct, but it doesn't follow from what I was
saying.
        Human beings are hard-wired to interpret their senses to model
reality. They also learn as a baby to expect reality to behave in
certain ways when subject to certain actions. If, as a designer,
your aim is to get people to feel they are "in" your virtual world
(ie. immersed), then the wise thing to do is to make sure that what
you present doesn't contradict the hard-wiring or the expectations
(except when you want to make an artistic point).
        That's what I was saying.

>The "right amount of realism" that I'm looking for is the complexity of
>interaction with the NPCs.  NPCs are currently dumb as a post and, for the
>most part, rely on being chock full of hit points in order to make a combat
>encounter "entertaining".  I want to flank and be flanked, to be able to
>talk down an aggressive NPC, to be faced with using my brain to solve NPC
>encounters with other players because each encounter is different.  I want
>big NPCs to be more physically powerful than small ones and so on.
        Yes, I want that too.

>Those
>are the rules of reality that I find to be mandatory.  Your soapbox post is
>pointing to the aspects of reality that you find entertaining.
        My soapbox post is about how virtual world designs get locked in
place by what newbies want. It's not about whether instances or PD are
good ideas, or whether anything else I happen to like or dislike is a good
idea or not. It's saying that whatever any of us like, we're at the
mercy of newbies as to whether we get it or not.

>If games cater to the bits and pieces of reality that people find
>entertaining
        But they don't. They cater to the bits and pieces that people
find entertaining in the short term, not the bits and pieces that
they'd find even more entertaining in the long term if they were
prepared to look further ahead.

>and given your profession, how do you believe the next crop of
>games will attempt to entertain us?
        The sooner we get niches, the better. They may not make a
lot of money commercially, but at least they'll introduce new
ideas.

                Richard