[MUD-Dev] Re: (fwd) Re: POLL: Games ruined by bad players (Player killers, tank rushers etc)

Koster Koster
Mon May 4 15:07:37 New Zealand Standard Time 1998

On Monday, May 04, 1998 3:32 PM Marian Griffith 
[SMTP:gryphon at iaehv.nl] wrote:
>Raph said:
> > Most muds, even those oriented towards play spaces, haven't tended 
> > give a very wide scope for play. The most complete play spaces, 
> > as MUSHes, have such a high barrier of entry for true "play" 
> > make TinyTim's clock!" "Sure! Let me just pull up my custom 
> > editor with integrated debugger!") that they are self-limiting...

> Actually I have to disagree with this.  PernMush (being the mush I 
> most familiar with) and other similarly themed mushes actually have 
> very low entry level.

For roleplay, yes? But a very high set of barriers, as I recall, 
before you can do any building (which is also play). (It's been a 
while since I visited PernMUSH, so I could be out of date).

> And what barrier there isn't a thing to do with
> code and everything with getting to know people.  I have become 
> good at volunteering other people to help me with the little coding 
> needed, but then I am famous for being unable even to program the 
> so perhaps I am excused from any coding chores by my friends ;)

What I was referring to was giving the *full scope* of play--so, if 
most people are satisfied by just the roleplay, great... but the 
building/softcode part of the play that MUSH code offers is usually 
restricted--and it's a form of play that is very appealing. (In fact, 
it was the ONLY form of play Alphaworld really offered beyond 

It's worth noting that the roleplay part of a mud isn't really a mud 
feature, because you don't need a mud to do it. The mud merely offers 
a context. The avenues for play the mud offers are actually its 
communications capabilities and its building capabilities.

> And here you may run into
> the gender bias that you mentioned at the beginning of your post. 
> I am excused to be overly generalistic. The young males generally 
> joy the competitive game oriented games  over the play oriented 
> And the women who would prefer the play oriented games  are not 
> in as great numbers on the internet looking for games.

Gender differences are very real in terms of audience... I wouldn't be 
surprised to hear that Dr Cat's project has a huge proportion of 
female players.

> Perhaps if you
> broaden your definition of 'game' to include talkers  you arrive at 
> significantly different distribution between the two types of game.

By Bettelheim's definition, a talker would indeed be "play."


MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list