Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Kleothera · 01-10-2009, 10:21 AM

About reviews-
I am basically advocating for what in social science research is called inter-observer reliability. I dont deny it was rather nice at the time to have been picked for review, but it was also I think the LAST TMC review they did (not sure havent checked the TMC review list in AGES), but it was certainly the first and last review the particular reviewer did. I guess I am biased based on my own social science research background, but in hindsight, it was probably to a large extent the case of a novice observer. Mentoring new reviewers may be a good idea to ensure they and the old hands at reviews review at the same level of oh validity and reliability. So I am a geek. Shoot me.

The category of staff we find difficult to find- heck, at this time ANY staff that wants to actually WORK to develop something instead of making fits and starts on projects and then their motivation fizzling out and me having to crack the whip. However, rant apart, most indie MUDs rely on people who code and RP and do stuff for fun. Which is GREAT, except when the MUD gets like a decade under its belt and then someone has to handle the dirty job of addressing the constant PR chore of explaining to the players why changes that are really badly needed (and were promised ages back) arent happening. If these changes do not happen. Failure to continue developing content is a major reason why a game's playebase falls from 40 odd players to 4-5. There are very few people who are really driven to make improvements because they are self driven (and coding or building or RPing consistently can be a chore and clash with RL) and not because someone reminds them of it. I think the ratio is like 1:10 in each of our streams of staff- coding, building and RP. My point would indirectly be, if a mud with self driver coder, but no self driven builder gets a self-driven builder of good areas, the game can improve exponentially. And I guess, good coders that are reliable and do what is needed, not what they feel is interesting to them at this point in time are as rare as ... well.. very damned rare.

Yes, any game can close down when the lead developer loses interest. However, if the game has developed a culture of the game being a common project, not that of one individual person, it would go on despite changes of the lead coder or owner or anything. In our over decade long existance we have I think changed like 6-7 Head Coders and 4 Owners. It still sputters along despite the usual explosive mix of immortal and player high drama. The our game split when the original owner returned from a long hiatus with the feeling of it being "his" game, with the team going one way and the owner the other. Our splinter group has changed owners THRICE since the spit. My point behind this bit of irrelevant history is yes, the game MAY shut down any day. But it can ALSO continue with different owners without any perceivable change in direction and the players even at times missing the fact that a change over has happened. It solely depends on the culture of the MUD. And no, we arent a closed group of people from the same college or anything that would make us exceptionally close to each other resulting in smooth transitions- our staff comes from four continents and most of us havent met each other IRL (our owner is in the US, our head coder in europe, our head of RP/PR/Mentors in Asia and well our head builder is kind of MIA atm but is from the US). If we can do it, I dont see why others cant.

01-10-2009, 10:21 AM	#18
Kleothera Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 50	Re: Looking for Suggestions About reviews- I am basically advocating for what in social science research is called inter-observer reliability. I dont deny it was rather nice at the time to have been picked for review, but it was also I think the LAST TMC review they did (not sure havent checked the TMC review list in AGES), but it was certainly the first and last review the particular reviewer did. I guess I am biased based on my own social science research background, but in hindsight, it was probably to a large extent the case of a novice observer. Mentoring new reviewers may be a good idea to ensure they and the old hands at reviews review at the same level of oh validity and reliability. So I am a geek. Shoot me. The category of staff we find difficult to find- heck, at this time ANY staff that wants to actually WORK to develop something instead of making fits and starts on projects and then their motivation fizzling out and me having to crack the whip. However, rant apart, most indie MUDs rely on people who code and RP and do stuff for fun. Which is GREAT, except when the MUD gets like a decade under its belt and then someone has to handle the dirty job of addressing the constant PR chore of explaining to the players why changes that are really badly needed (and were promised ages back) arent happening. If these changes do not happen. Failure to continue developing content is a major reason why a game's playebase falls from 40 odd players to 4-5. There are very few people who are really driven to make improvements because they are self driven (and coding or building or RPing consistently can be a chore and clash with RL) and not because someone reminds them of it. I think the ratio is like 1:10 in each of our streams of staff- coding, building and RP. My point would indirectly be, if a mud with self driver coder, but no self driven builder gets a self-driven builder of good areas, the game can improve exponentially. And I guess, good coders that are reliable and do what is needed, not what they feel is interesting to them at this point in time are as rare as ... well.. very damned rare. Yes, any game can close down when the lead developer loses interest. However, if the game has developed a culture of the game being a common project, not that of one individual person, it would go on despite changes of the lead coder or owner or anything. In our over decade long existance we have I think changed like 6-7 Head Coders and 4 Owners. It still sputters along despite the usual explosive mix of immortal and player high drama. The our game split when the original owner returned from a long hiatus with the feeling of it being "his" game, with the team going one way and the owner the other. Our splinter group has changed owners THRICE since the spit. My point behind this bit of irrelevant history is yes, the game MAY shut down any day. But it can ALSO continue with different owners without any perceivable change in direction and the players even at times missing the fact that a change over has happened. It solely depends on the culture of the MUD. And no, we arent a closed group of people from the same college or anything that would make us exceptionally close to each other resulting in smooth transitions- our staff comes from four continents and most of us havent met each other IRL (our owner is in the US, our head coder in europe, our head of RP/PR/Mentors in Asia and well our head builder is kind of MIA atm but is from the US). If we can do it, I dont see why others cant.