Brand Loyalty (was Re: [MUD-Dev] Requirements for MM (wasComp lexities of MMOG Servers))

Koster Koster
Wed Jan 1 17:40:55 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003

From: Dubious Advocate
> From: "Amanda Walker" <amanda at>
>> On 12/17/02 11:45 PM, Dubious Advocate
>> <dubiousadvocate at> wrote:
>>> We don't see this in the Central MOG industry today.  Developers
>>> bemoan the absence of brand loyalty
>> Where have you heard developers bemoaning the absence of brand
>> loyalty?
> Whenever they rationalize certain design decisions, e.g. enforced
> socialization.  Spend some time on the rant sites and you'll hear
> devs make comments like this fairly often.

I am not sure what this has to do with brand loyalty per se, but
I'll make the assertions that

  treadmills are good
  forced socialization is good
  downtime is good

even in the face of much outcry from many, many people. There's a
lot more to the dynamics of human behavior beyond "I'm bored" and "I
want to be self-sufficient."

Perhaps as a reversal it would sound less like a rationalization:

  a mud without a treadmill will fail
  a mud without socialization will fail
  a mud without downtime will fail

This says nothing about whether players LIKE these things to be
there. It speaks more to what *humans* like than it does to what
*people* like, if you catch my drift.

> They plan for burnout, and rather than address burnout at its core
> they heap on addictive features.

Oh, forgot one.

  People burn out on any given hobby.

Why is it rationalization to accept this fact?

Now, I think I know what you are driving at. You're pointing out
that it's very easy for developers to hide behind these as
excuses. Well, sure. That's not the way to keep a playerbase happy,
certainly. But I think our time would be well-spent by investigating
why the above statements seem to be true, rather than decrying those
who hide behind them without critical self-evaluation.


MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list