[MUD-Dev2] [DESIGN} Who to design for?

[cruise]

Thus spake Sean Howard...
>  "Damion Schubert" <dschubert at gmail.com>  wrote:
> 
>> 1) Your game design should have a central theme or activity that everyone
>> gets and understands.
> 
> I agree with the central them - big fan of strong backbones here - but I'm
> not sure I understand the "everyone gets" thing. I'm not sure everyone
> "gets" the average MUD or MMORPG unless they've already played one. I
> don't know, maybe that's the main obstacle against adoption.

I think we're still trying to find a theme "everyone" gets - I'd argue 
the Sims came the closest, and it's one reason it's so popular. 
Alternatively, something that's so abstract/different, like Tetris, that 
again no one starts with preconceptions.

Either way, having the players start on an equal footing with regards to 
game knowledge would seem to help more be willing to try it.

<snip>

> I think you can sell very complex games to casual gamers. It doesn't have
> to be easy. Chess isn't easy, it's not fun (in the traditional sense), and
> with specialized pieces with non-standard movement and capturing
> abilities, there is quite a learning curve.  Chess (or even Monopoly or
> Risk) is far more complicated than something like God of War, and yet,
> everybody has played it. This leads me to believe that the difference
> between a casual game and a hardcore game is nothing more than flashiness.
> 
> You sell a casual game to a casual player by selling a game. You sell a
> hardcore game to a hardcore gamer by selling a way of life. It's easier to
> sell to a hardcore gamer because of this - they'll buy more games because
> they don't buy games based on individual merit alone.

So, by not saying, "There's tonnes of stuff you'll have to understand 
before you can hope to enjoy this game" we'll get more casual gamers? 
Seems reasonably self-evident, and complements my comments above about 
familiarity. Still doesn't explain WoW though :P

>> 4) Your game design should result in a culture where hardcore players are
>> evangelizing the game to casual players.  WoW's success comes largely
>> from classic EQ players finally being willing to recommend an MMO to
>> their wives and girlfriends.
> 
> I think you've got that backwards. You need the non-hardcore (not casual,
> but somewhere inbetween - maybe a hardcore gamer who grew up and had a
> family and still tries to keep up with gaming) to evangelize a game to the
> casual player. WoW's success didn't come from Everquest. It came from
> Diablo and Warcraft II - two games which breached that gap before. Once
> you have the hardcore talking about a game, they talk about the wrong
> stuff and put the emphasis on the wrong things, and it will do more harm
> than good for casual players.

While it may not go directly from hardcore to casual, but remember 
that's not an either/or proposition - it's a continuum, and it can flow 
along it with relative ease. The further along that continuum it reaches 
before someone says, "I have to learn too much to play this" the greater 
the market. The threshold of "too much" obviously will vary depending on 
how much hype is being pushed their way. WoW had enormous amounts of 
hype, and is remarkably easy to pick up for an MMOG. Hence it went 
further down that line than before.

>> 5) Your game design should have subtle ways and means for players to
>> increase their investment, so that casual players become more hardcore
>> as time passes.
> 
> Do you think my 55-year old parents who play Wii bowling every day are
> going to suddenly think that, hey, maybe they should try out EVE Online?
> No, you don't make casuals hardcore. That only works for teenagers and
> college students.

Of course you can make casuals into hardcore players. That's /how/ you 
get hardcore players. It's just faster for teenagers and younger people 
generally as they're quicker to assimilate change and adapt.