[MUD-Dev] Star Wars Galaxies: 1 character per server

Rayzam rayzam at travellingbard.com
Sat Jan 18 14:19:06 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003

From: "Vincent Archer" <archer at frmug.org>
> According to Matt Mihaly:

>>> That there can, no doubt.

>>> That there should, it remains in contention.

>> How is that a contentious statement? It's like saying, "The world
>> is fundamentally incapable of making everybody simultaneously
>> happy." It's barely worth arguing about. Some people have
>> fundamentally opposing desires, which ensures that there is no
>> way to ever make everybody happy.

> I'll make the same answer to Amanda and you.

> My sentence was a bit too generic (as you can guess, it applied
> chiefly to the debate at hand, namely SCS vs MCS).

> There's a large difference between having a game that happens to
> be attractive to some and unattractive to others, and making a
> game that is specifically not attractive to a certain category of
> people.

> When you add a feature, you add it for the specific purpose of
> getting people. Most features will attract and repel people to
> various degrees, and you don't pick a feature because it
> discourages people. You choose it because you think it will please
> more people than it displeases.

> You never make a game expecting that people won't play it. Well, I
> hope for you :)

I see history repeating itself. I recently suggested that powergamer
is just the new term for min-maxing from PnP games. There's another
old PnP term: twinks. Some PnP systems were designed to prevent
twinking. Yep, they had features to discourage certain types of

Now, the market for twinking was really big, as FASA
[Battletech/Shadowrun] could attest to. But some companies designed
features against these money-spending consumers for a smaller market
and a game/vision that they wanted to create. And they were viable
until the CCG shakeout of the rpg industry :)


MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list