[MUD-Dev2] What is agame?(again)was:[Excellentcommentary onVanguard's diplomacy system]

[Dave Scheffer]

----- Original Message -----
From: "cruise" <cruise at casual-tempest.net>
To: <mud-dev2 at lists.mud-dev.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev2] What is agame?(again)was:[Excellentcommentary 
onVanguard's diplomacy system]

> The difference is the game gracefully handles this "edge case", as it 
> were - the game knows the players are doing something unwanted, whereas 
> normally it is requiring humans to make that judgement. Whether the game's 
> response is sufficient is another question, but is a much easier problem.
>
> Sure, some will try and break the system, but they'll be fewer, and they 
> should have that choice, even if the end result is naegative for them.

Exactly.

My biggest complaint since I was playing BBS door games is not that the 
games were insufficient self-policing but that the community owners often 
chose not to weed out the clearly disruptive players.  Pre-Trammel UO 
remains the classic example.

(I want to head off any perception that I am provoking UO - it remains in my 
mind the paragon of promise for what a gameworld could be, and the lessons 
learned to the rest of the industry are beyond priceless and always 
relevant.)