[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #271 - 30 msgs

[Richard A. Bartle]

On 6th March 2001, Dr Cat wrote:

> The important generalist perspective here is to realize that the
> forms of validation that people want are not universal.

That's true, of course.

> Other methods like a "high score list", getting a lot of in-game
> money, getting the praise of one's peers, or finding a
> girlfriend/boyfriend may be the preferred form of validation for
> many people, more than "accomplishment in spite of potential
> permadeath".

Those would be the people who wouldn't ever feel the need to go to a
badlands area where they'd risk PD, then.

> Having a game where you can only gain, only make forward progress,
> and never lose anything is very unrealistic.

Is anyone using the "realistic" argument here in support of PD?

> Most people get their validation that the
> gold/levels/items/etc. "mean something" from another source

This is like pokemon cards. They were ostensibly a game, but no-one
really played it as it was way too complicated for the kids who
watched the TV show (well, in my part of the world anyway). They used
to "mean something" when all the kids collected them and if you had a
rare one you could trade it for all kinds of goodies. Then, after a
while, people began to realise that they were actually worthless. If
you wanted a particular rare one, it was just a case of spending money
until you got it. It wasn't so much that they were rare as that the
others were ubiquitous. The bubble burst. Cards had no intrinsic
meaning, only such meaning as determined by the interest of other
people who had them. Once that went, there was no reason for anyone to
collect them any more.

So it is with characters in most graphical MUDs. The players are told
that the higher levels are an achievement, but there's nothing to back
that up. Any dolt can get one just by spending enough money. Players
who get to the top levels first are happy to go along with the
charade, but once the population of maxed out characters gets too big
they won't be.

PD gives value to high-level characters. It supports the assertion
that obtaining one is an achievement. No-one can debase the currency.

Now people don't have to risk PD to feel they're achieving. My
grandfather collected matchbox labels. I have 26,000 in my attic. It
wasn't like he was ever going to get a full set, and he didn't know
anyone else who collected them, he just did it as a hobby because he
personally enjoyed it. There are plenty of people like that in
persistent worlds, validating their achievements internally. That's
great. Did they start out intending to play that way, though? Not
usually. They started out because they wanted to play the game.

Persistent worlds are sold as games, and people who start to play them
expect a game component. Maybe not 10 years hence, but certainly now.
Being a game is the foundation of the whole enterprise. Magic:the
Gathering lasted as long as it did because the game was good. Pokemon
was basically the same game, but had a much younger audience so the
cards were worthless as game components. To them, the "game" was
collecting a set, which isn't much of a game once your friends have
got one before you.

When you start to play in a persistent world, you want to know what to
do. The game component gives you a goal. You might reject that after a
while and do your own thing, but newbies do need to be given
direction.  If they're told that the aim is to get to be level 100,
and they can see the game is stuffed with level 100 characters,
they're going to wonder if it's worthwhile.

People may not end up playing the "game" as advertised, but it
nevertheless has to be a good one. It's a shared experience; it's why
they were all there in the first place. It's what you do when you want
to take a break from however else you enjoy yourself. It's always
THERE.

If it's a mockery, that can't be a good thing.

> The usual quote I hope to be remembered for after I'm dead,
> "Attention is the currency of the future" and all that.

Nah. Once it happens, someone will say "Attention is the new currency"
and everyone will use that instead.

> (Prediction - the combat-mud-focused population of Mud-Dev will
> spend far more time and energy talking about what I said are the
> ways to improve a combat game than the ways to implement an
> attention oriented social game.  Let's watch and see.)

Well given that you just spent more time on the former than the
latter, it's a pretty good bet!

Richard

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