[MUD-Dev] Storytelling vs simulation, AGAIN! was Re: Influent ial muds
J C Lawrence
claw at varesearch.com
Fri Mar 12 18:08:22 New Zealand Daylight Time 1999
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:07:22 -0800 (PST)
Matthew Mihaly <diablo at best.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> In the final analysis, mechanical games are boring and people,
>> and their machinations are endlessly fascinating (cf soap
>> operas). The scale between the Talkers (or IRC) and pure gamist
>> MUDs is that of the extent to which the venue (MUD) provides a
>> defined backdrop and toolset to those human machinations.
>> Expressive fertility.
> Boring is a subjective word. I can't remember if it was you or
> Raph that pointed out that despite (or maybe even because of) the
> ridiculous, mechanical simplicity of Shades, it was a lot of fun.
I did, and which you are right, is a very curious anomaly. Some
classes of simulations (eg SimEarth, SimCity, Civilisation, Empires,
etc) also break this pattern. Shades does it very curiously, by
providing a very very simple obvious mechanical pattern that some
remains "fun" despite its very apparent roteness. Sim* get it thru
> By way of another, even more extreme example, I present you with
Touche. It would seem that mechanility is not the corret term.
J C Lawrence Internet: claw at kanga.nu
---------(*) Internet: claw at varesearch.com
...Honorary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
MUD-Dev maillist - MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev