[MUD-Dev] MMORPG/MMOG P2P design
Felix A. Croes
felix at dworkin.nl
Tue Mar 4 03:05:13 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003
"Crosbie Fitch" <crosbie at cyberspaceengineers.org> wrote:
> From: Felix A. Croes
>> There is an implicit ownership of the player's character by the
>> player who controls it,
> Maybe to most, but I make a distinction between an avatar being
> allocated to a player, and the avatar object being owned by the
> player's node. In my book, 'ownership', whatever it is of, is
> granted carefully (to the most appropriate node - which isn't
> necessarily the player's node). In any case, it wouldn't be that
> difficult to create two objects the avatar's golem and the
> avatar's power (if such were needed). One may require a more
> trusted host/owner than the other.
My point is that the trust model doesn't matter -- the player object
is still under the control of the player who plays it, and thus, in
a sense, "owns" it. I am not just playing word definition games.
In the text leading up to what you quoted above, I tried to explain
why this notion of ownership is important, precisely because it does
not coincide with the official one.
>> and ownership of a high-level character does not match a high
>> level of trust in the game's P2P infrastructure.
> The term 'high-level character' is full of MUD like overtones and
> the way MUDs are designed.
I would argue that the same situation exists in any game with
in-game assets, MUDs just being an extreme example.
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev