Re: "End game" content?
Yes, that makes more sense, and like you, I've weighed time invested in creating "ready-to-eat" consumables vs. time invested in creating tools/systems etc. that add different entertainment aspects to gameplay. Usually, the latter wins in terms of bang for your buck. An additional benefit of developing unique tools/twists is that they are more likely to appeal to veteran mudders than e. g. a 100% custom world.
That said, I still think that you need a healthy dose of consumable content acting as the foundation on which you and your players can build. I've seen games that rely too heavily on user-generated content/entertainment, and unless they take off in a huge way (unlikely to happen to any new text-based game these days), they seem to always end up either desolated or filled with a complete hotch-potch of ideas, structures, etc. If you put the burden of success/failure too much on the shoulders of your players, then you should be prepared for the worst, with little means to prevent it.
Also, in my estimate about 70% of our current player base will always prefer to consume rather than create. If the game didn't have years of content that is ready to consume, I would imagine all these people would move on rather than labor to create their own fun. Nowadays, lazy people have a lot of consumable game content at their fingertips, and would readily spend money on it just so they don't have to think.
And a final point. While it is true that you can never create content fast enough to satisfy the hunger of your current power players, over time you can cultivate / accumulate enough of it up to a point where people will be quitting for reasons other than lack of content. Like you said, if you entertain anyone for several years for free, that's already pretty huge.
|