[MUD-Dev] Bay Area Press re: UO, the good the bad and the Ugl y.

[Sellers]

Jessica wrote:
> Raph expresses a thought I've heard many designers articulate over the
> years.  Now, here's where all those figures above come in (and where
Jessica
> steps out on a limb):
> 
> I have yet to meet a designer that wasn't in the top 20% category above.
> Most of us are in the top 5% category.  I suspect one reason we keep
> designing these games the way we do, is that they are therapy for US, who
> are so like the hard core players.
> 
> If that is true, is it any wonder that the MMPOGs we design continually
tend
> to appeal quite heavily to 20% of the players?

I think that limb is a bit creaky.  I'm definitely not in that top 20%, nor
have I been since I first started playing games or MUDs.  Designing games is
an entirely different activity for me than playing them; I get much more
enjoyment out of designing them than playing them, actually.  It's like
saying driving cars and designing cars are the same.  To me, they're just
not -- and that's a useful thing to realize.  Too many people go through the
fallacious thought process of "hey, I love playing games, I bet I'd love
designing them too!"  

Having said that, I think you're mostly correct in your final point: ours
has been a mighty in-bred sector of a generally insular and in-bred
industry.  It's no wonder at all that we're attracting a very thin but very
dedicated slice of the customer pie.  Everyone talks about how they want to
make games that break out of that mold, and then they proceed to apply the
same designs, same principles, same rewards and structure to the games they
produce!  It's been said that a good definition of insanity is doing the
same thing over and over and expecting different results.  If so, that puts
us as an industry in a difficult spot.  

Can games, particularly MMPOGs, be useful psychological and psychosocial
therapy?  Clearly, yes: anecdotes of this can be found in each of the major
online games.  However, they are good therapy only in the same way that
scummy stagnant pond water is good drinking -- you have to have been dying
of thirst in the desert before it looks good to you at all.  Before we can
sell online games as good entertainment (much less good therapy) to the
general public, we have to force ourselve to have a better product than the
equivalent of smelly dirty water.  That kind of product will continue to
sell well only to those who are dying of thirst in a psychological or social
desert, which will always be the same thin rind on society in general.


Mike Sellers



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