It does seem like the people there are more willing to tell newbies what they shouldn't do rather than what they should do, though. Perhaps a little more lenience towards very new players might be popular? Depends whether you feel you want more newbies, I suppose...

In my opinion, any review that Godwins itself isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Other than that, it looks like the "game collective" of immortals and players were doing their best to accommodate a new player who was unfamiliar not only with the game, but the game genre, by providing helpful pointers, including the relevant help files.

But to be honest, the reviewer is a) stuck in an "I can't get any help so I'm not going to accept any help, so that I can call it unhelpful" mindset and b) reviewing a role-play mud without knowing what "rp" stands for, which says something for the quality of the review. I respectfully reiterate my first paragraph.

Valg,

Don't take the 'nazi' label as a personal insult having anything to do with WWII.  The term 'rp nazi' is a common one I've heard,  used to refer to someone who insists that all rp must follow a particular set of rules (and usually it is rules not to their liking).

As somone who runs a mud, you obviously must have decided on some rules for your game.  If someone with a more relaxed attitude came along and found your rules too strict or confining, then that explains their use of the 'rp nazi' (or nazi-esque) label. Blame Seinfeld's soup nazi "No soup for you!" for the term. 

A longer thread about the use of this term and suggested alternates can be found .

But it's about the attitude. Pashka thought it was the only channel available for what was considered a valid comment; nobody explained whether this was true or false. The 'immortal' (who obviously didn't want to be accountable, always a bad sign) wasn't exactly very friendly in advising about the nature of communication. In fact they almost went so far as to censor any kind of discussion. Maybe that was the wrong channel for such a debate, but I didn't see anyone explaining where the correct channel was, if one even exists. Saying "don't do that; look at this help file, it tells you not to do it" is not helping a newbie, it's community policing. Overall it just seemed like an overly taciturn and unfriendly way of dealing with new players, and the phrase "that's not real conducive to true newbies" looks very true.

Yup.  I'm aware a lot of people throw it around lightly.  I just find it ignorant.

I thought that was what was being communicated in the Immortal's first two responses.  Maybe we're reading it differently.

Actually, our guidelines are that rules/OOC matters are handled like that where possible.  It disentangles the "nuts and bolts" running of the MUD with the person's IC persona.   Because mortal/immortal IC contact is reasonably common, we don't want it influenced by things like this.

As for accountability, we log an awful lot, and we have multiple mechanisms in place for handling complaints against Immortals.  Within the ranks, feedback is swift and common.  Since we have a staff of 30+ Immortals, you're rarely steering the ship alone in any case.

In re-reading, I was wrong to say that the question wasn't answered, but I still don't feel it was answered in a polite or very explanatory way. Admittedly the whole setup seems a little newbie-hostile, but such is the way of games like yours. No doubt it filters out a lot of the more annoying players...

I just want to add to this that anyone who ends their conversation with an insult (Imm on crack) and a meaningless threat (lost a few players for that one) generally doesn't merit much concern. In my experience, these have been the people who wanted everything handed to them and became upset when they were taught how to help themselves instead. He loses credibility even further with the fact that he didn't ask for any sort of help, didn't ask any questions, and contributed absolutely nothing useful to the conversation. As far as I can tell from the snippet that was posted, the immortal in question was very polite and professional.

As for accountability, I’m sorry, but you don't know what you 're talking about.  Just because you can't see their name here, doesn't mean they aren't accountable for their actions.

So if that immortal had chosen to be rude or offensive, and no other immortal was there at the time to witness it, how would a player go about submitting a complaint? This is why real-world police are usually numbered.

As for advising about the nature of communication:  The immortal gave them the pertinent information.  I fail to see where you thought such "wasn't exactly very friendly."

The players didn't want information. They wanted help. Instead they were just told that they were going the wrong way about getting that help.

Carrion Fields is intended to be an immersive RP environment.  Such an environment isn't something that goes well with abundant OOC channels.

And if a player thinks a help file is misleading (as in this case),or is interested in discussing something with a member of staff? Sorry, no discussion allowed. (Apparently.) "e-mail, in-game notes, and our official web-site" are not convenient ways for a MUD-player to communicate with one of the admins.

Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.  Teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime.

Tell a man "no, don't eat meat. we don't eat meat here. type 'help fish'. This is not the place to ask about meat.", and he'll probably leave to find somewhere that is going to be a bit more friendly when correcting his ignorance.

Carrion Fields has a lot of easily accessible help files.  How is it unfriendly to teach newbies that this information  A.  exists, and B. is readily available?

It's a stock response for mud staff everywhere to think that player assistance begins and ends with help files. It shouldn't. There are too many things you can't really learn from just reading. It takes a fellow human to help you to understand. This is why universities don't just give you a pile of books and tell you to come back for the exams in 3 or 4 years.

As far as what you term 'community  policing' from the above log:  how is that a bad thing?  Other more experienced players know the rules and the game, and were obviously trying to help steer the newbie in the right direction.  When everyone pitches in to help those new to the game…how can that be a harmful or unfriendly thing?

People pitching in is good; it's the way they go about it. All the 'help' in the transcribed interaction was regarding what not to do, and where to read about not doing it. Nobody made reference to the original problem that brought this up - apparent inability to find hunting partners. Would it have been so wrong to have given the newbies a hand in telling them where (in game) they have the best chance of meeting people? Or maybe you have a help file on that which you could direct them to? Did anyone take Pashka seriously and ask about this alleged erroneous help file? Whereas Vrac may well have an attitude problem, I don't think the conversation treats Pashka very well.

(Newbie) Nashalya: Got to do that by asking people

(Newbie) Babbette: usually they do it in rp

(Newbie) Tzydin: groupmaters are IC (in-character) matter

(Newbie) Nashalya: use who group and who newbie to find people to ask

(Newbie) Gremnosh: Help tell

(Newbie) Alexi: who group shows a list of those whom it is possible for you to group with

(Newbie) An Immortal: 'help newbie channel' explains. Use say, tell, etc. to communicate with other players IC.

(Newbie) Tzydin: then type 'help newbie' and 'help newbie2'

(Newbie) Tzydin: and in the end type 'help ic' and you're set

----------------------

All the above look like -positive- rather than -negative- sends from players who are offering their help. It's pretty clear to me that they were being short and concise so as to deliver the information requested without a lot of fluff inbetween.

If you want fluffy snuggly-pooh teddy-bear hand-outs, find a fluffy snuggly-pooh teddy-bear game. In your post, your wording of your opinion seems to imply that you would rather have had half the game start shouting HEY NEWBIE WELCOME TO THE GAME! Glad to have you here, so how's your mom? Do you have a dog? I do, his name's Fluff and he's great! Oh and by the way, find me in the game and pretend that you don't know me. I'm Jojo and I'm on Main Street at the tavern. you can get there from where you are by typing n, ne, e, ne, up, s, e, ne, enter tavern. Then look for me, you'll know it's me because my name's on your screen. Don't worry that my character doesn't know you from a hole in the wall. We'll just pretend we're roleplaying and I"ll give you lots of stuff and take you hunting. Even though my race hates yours but hey - it's just a game right? We'll pretend that my character likes yours anyway. Just so I can help you. And take you hunting. And give you stuff. Oh and don't worry about that OOC newbie channel, you can just ask me ooc stuff when we meet up and ignore the rules since no one cares about them anyway. They just SAY it's a strict game where you really need to read the helpfiles before playing, but they don't really mean it.

OR

They could just save themselves a lot of unneccessary drivel by saying exactly what was said. If a newbie's feelings get hurt by being given facts instead of diatribe, then he probably shouldn't be playing that kind of game anyway.

The original question was answered, by a few different people, each giving different information that would help the newbie find what he needed to find in the most appropriate method available. Perhaps you prefer the touchy-feely method, but touchy-feely isn't efficient. As for "where in the game" they should find people, I'm guessing the helpfiles explained in great detail either exactly where to find them, or how to look for them via roleplaying and aventure. I don't play Carrion Fields so I wouldn't know but it sounds like the kind of game that takes its help files and RP-enforcement seriously.

Well I'm not one of "you guys" - meaning I'm not on their staff, or one of the player "Helpers" - and I'm still considered a newbie on Arm.

But even after just over a year of playing, I've come to truly appreciate being given only enough help needed to find what I need on my own.

And in some cases, I get enough information to learn that what I'm looking for, I shouldn't be able to find at all...or that maybe it isn't appropriate for me to be looking in the first place.

It sounds to me like Carrion Fields runs things in a similar way, though slightly less restrictive because you have a Newbie channel whereas Arm does not.

For whoever takes issue with Carrion Fields' method of helping players, I would suggest you -not- try Armageddon. If you can't handle concise, clear information delivered without a lot of fluff, you will absolutely HATE Arm. And that's fine too. Like Valq says - what you find attractive in a game, others might find unattractive - and vice versa. No crime in that, as long as you take the time to investigate first.

You already said the immortal wasn't very friendly, and taciturn. Other people have disagreed, accountabilty has nothing to do with it. Even then, as you can see it was already logged, and those in charge probably know who did it. Logs abound on muds.

We all saw the log, it was even in the note you replied to.

(Newbie) Pashka: is this not the only channel available? i thought that in one of the help files it was also where we could search for and find hunting partners
(Newbie) An Immortal: All mortal-mortal communication is done In Character.
(Newbie) An Immortal: No, that's what it's not for. It's only for out of character questions about the game.
(Newbie) An Immortal: 'help newbie channel' explains. Use say, tell, etc. to communicate with other players IC.


Looks like an abundance of help.

That is another misleading statement. The real situation: Player asks if there are any other channels and if this one is appropriate. Player is told no, IC is the only way these are the commands and here is the help file for finding out more.

This would be akin to: Joe asks if there is any other food, and if this mushroom is appropriate. Joe is told no, fish is the only thing to eat here, there is the stream and here's some tips.

More like because people are too lazy to do it themselves. Just kidding, you are wrong. Many universities offer distant learning, quite a few of my friends have received diplomas online from real colleges and universities. (

Q1: It's roleplaying, find out. =)
Q2: Pashka asked: "Is this the only channel available?" followed by a musing about thinking he could use it to find a hunting buddy. They directed him to the help file.


I think he was treated quite well, from what I saw of the log. If there was more of the log that I have not seen, feel free to correct me.

Jazuela
Bwahahaha. I love it. Sounds about right on the money for most of the twinks that log on RP-Muds. Although I must say there was a time when the whole IC/OOC was stupid to me as well, until I learned better.

Kaylus, your interpretation of the transcript is way too literal and ignores the context. The newbie didn't care about channels, the newbie cared about trying to find hunting partners. That's the 'help' they wanted. The only reason they subsequently asked about channels is because they were obviously told not to look for partners on that channel. Telling the newbies what not to do with the newbie channel may well be necessary, but it's not help that is relevant to their current problem.

Thus, you seem to have missed the entire point of my argument.

Quite what your point about accountability is, I don't know. I prefer people to be visible so that they know that they can't get away with being rude and hiding behind their anonymity. In fact, anonymity is a well-known psychological factor in encouraging anti-social behaviour. The imms on Carrion Fields are probably great, but anonymous figures telling you what you can and can't do tends to come across as unfriendly. You can argue that it is necessary for whatever reason, and I won't argue that point without knowing more about the game in question... but it's still unfriendly from a newbie point of view. Which is what this was about.

As for logs... yes, most muds keep logs, but few will log every channel used by every character. Maybe Carrion Fields is an exception, but that would be a lot of text, given that they're not a small mud.

And the 'distant learning' thing, that does not make me wrong, that just means that there are exceptions. Most learning is not done from distance, for good reason.

Regarding a hypothetical:

1) Submit an email, give the time and date of the problem, along with a log from your perspective. A more senior member of the staff then verifies the log, and if necessary handles the situation.

2) Wait for one of the other immortals who is probably on (again, not a small staff) to quietly smack the rogue immortal for being unneccessarily rude.

The better answer is "we train our staff so that this hypothetical is a very rare case." Our staff runs older than most also- I don't know the median age but I'd guess it's much closer to 30 than 20. I keep the newbie channel on whenever I am on, and I can say that it is very rare that I've had to speak with a staff member about conduct, and more common that I have to speak to a player about being rude to a questioner.

Carrion Fields is designed to be a low barrier-to-entry game- there are no lengthy prerequisites (pre-approvals, applications, submitted information, etc.) to getting started. Thus, there will occasionally be a couple jerks around who log on and feel the need to answer new player questions with insults, but it's not very hard for us to handle those situations by talking to them, and removing their access to the channel if it becomes clear they have no intention of being helpful.

In summary, in theory you can create scenarios where our RP immersion (separation of IC/OOC personae) causes chaos or corruption. In practice, however, we've been around nearly ten years, and we know how to handle these sorts of things.

Forums are retarded. So is carrionfields.

Y'know, all of the loyal playerbase that CF has created though 8 years of natural selection have changed my mind.  You see, it's now obvious to me that if this many people on FORUMS post this much positive information about your mud.. It must mean YOU and your mud are great.

I don't know what I was thinking.  This many people can't be wrong!

HAHahahahah.  Congratulations Valg, you've got your own squad of yes-men.  See what happens when you can gift people pk-powers in a pk-mud?


Valg is absolutely ****ing right. If 13 people respond to my TMC review in a matter of a few days.. Then I must be the raving lunatic.


THe masses are never wrong! Hiel Valguarnera.

Pay attention Amnon. Nothing is ever established on forums or reviews. Congratulations, though, if it makes you feel better.

Yes, most of the playerbase at CF doesn't like when someone spews non-stop bull**** about something we have all contributed to and enjoy.  I think most people are protective of the things they care about.  And if you had any history other than your short stint as Josiah, you would know that a lot of those reviews were written by players who don't neccessarily get along with the staff.



In your review of CF, you said you'd been playing for 2 years.  You are so full of **** it's pathetic.  If I were being generous, I'd say you played for all of 6 months before you started in with your bull****.  I actually think it was more like 1-2 months.  I was going to go to  and just start throwing down all the links of your posts and let them speak for themselves, but if the people reading this want a good laugh, all they have to do is go there themselves and do a search for Josiah/Soljax.  Oh, and don't try searching in 2002, cause there's nothing there from him.  Wonder why a veteran player has no background, oh wait, that's right.  Because like everything else you say, you're full of ****.<a href=" target="_blank">The post (dated for convenience) of Josiah's wherein he is actually honest about his knowledge of CF</a>

<a href=" target="_blank">Dioxide's CF Page</a>

Well, getting back to the original post, I think that both sides acted in a slightly disagreeable manner. The player was rather impatient and rude but the immortals seemed less than helpful. But that aside, I think it brings to light another issue.

If the newbie channel is for not for mortal-to-mortal communication, why allow posts/responses to be seen by all? Wouldn't a petitioning system work just as well and eliminate the global channel?

I for one don't like global channels on a RP MUD. The above situation seems to me like proof of how they can be misinterpreted by new players and how they can contribute unnecessary ooc talk in a MUD.

Again, that's my opinion, for whatever it's worth.

Take care,

Jason

In Cf you can only hear the channel up to 10th level, you can also turn it off whenever you like.

I think the reason they made it a global newbie channel is so that it has the potential to cut down on repeat questions. Two people have the same question, one asks over the channel and is answered, therefore the other can get his question answered without even having to ask.

It would seem that people who post responses to "reviews" of their MUD are only hurting themselves, not helping.

I don't think many people read and take the reviews seriously. Many of them seem to say the same thing. Good ones rave about the newbie friendly environment and friendly staff. Bad ones rave about cheating immortals and harsh players.

To be honest, I think that most of the people who read reviews are people who play that particular game. They read the review to see what the disgruntled player had to say, then feel the need to defend themselves. A fair option, of course, and who can blame them?

I don't own a mud. If I did, I would be hurt and irritated by the occassional player who flamed my game and my staff and would most likely do what many other muds seem to be doing now: Posting rebuttals to those reviews in the forums here.

But just sitting here, from an outside perspective, it only seems like it hurts the mud owner's game. It draws attention to a review that probably many didn't read to begin with.

It really doesn't have anything to do with hurt feelings. The review, in my opinion, was factually incorrect and an inaccurate representation of a game I (and 30+ others) administrate. I posted a log of the interaction in question so that people can make a decision based on facts, not the opinion of someone who spent minutes playing.

We're big on accountability, internally and externally. If someone insists on posting a hatchet job, and the moderators of the site prefer not to involve themselves, we're going to post the facts and clear the air.

I think that what the player did was bad, insulting the Immortal staff of a highly respected game is not the way to go. However I do feel that there is a slight problem in your mud Valg.

If I was a new player, and with your mud being SO popular, I would expect live help, where people can teach me the ropes, and answer my questions directly. I absolutely HATE seeing muds where they tell you "oh yeah just type help this help that". Although it is an easy way to pass by, it is better to explain someone thoroughly according to the subject manner. I go by what that other guy had to say, "You don't go to school just to read books, you go there because someone actually teaches you the stuff INSIDE the book". Same thing here, you don't just type help newbie and read it all, someone has to guide you as well.

As for the player, I think what he did was very rude and pathetic, slanderring a game like that, and slanderring the Immortals with only a few minutes of game-play is pathetic.

Recap: From reading the logs I saw no "rudeness" or anything from the Immortal and players of the mud. In fact I saw the inability to work with them from the player. But I do see something lacking in the players and Immortal's "way of helping". As an Immortal he should be more responsible, I mean you don't hire Immortals just to tell players read "help this and that", you hire them to help. Once again don't bog me down on this, I'm a small mud owner, you don't have to take what I say seriously at all, it's just my 2 cents worth.

-Demiscus

I think everyone is missing the point here. This all started out because of a review that was posted and someone's response to a review.

Reviews are for players to post their OPINIONS about a game. Now since it's an opinion it may or may not agree with the opinions of others. It also means that it may or may not be based on what actually happened and instead on what that person thought happened.

If your game really is that great then you should have all sorts of other reviews to counter the one bad review that was posted about your mud. If that's not the case, I can see why you're bringing this up here.

I don't care either way personally, I'm not taking sides and I'm not trying to put anyone down. It just seems like a big to do about ONE review.

Kub

No, I think YOU are missing the point.

Libel is not opinion. Lying about a game in an effort to hurt it is not presenting an opinion.

People should not be allowed to take a hatchet to an innocent and then be excused because they call it "opinion."

Hmmm... It sure sounds like you took a side.