[Will]

Originally Posted by KaVir Well you could (rightly) argue that all muds have to provide the right environment for their target audience, regardless of how broad or narrow that audience might be - in fact I'd argue that knowing your audience is one of the most important aspects of mud design. Catering to more than one style of player may require extra care, but that doesn't mean it can't be done; personally I'd be interested to see a HnS/PK/RPI mud.

I guess the thing that worries me about a game like this is that it divides the players into very seperate populations. One of the biggest issues faced by text games today is the ability to grow, and it takes a crowd to bring in new blood. In my opinion, the design described on the linked page would isolate two-thirds of the players from each other and essentially create three separate games. I don't believe it's ever a good idea to implement built-in barriers to interactivity and communication. The pool of people interested in text gaming just isn't big enough, no matter how good a game design is.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by Will I guess the thing that worries me about a game like this is that it divides the players into very seperate populations.

Only if you assume that the players would normally all be playing together. The point of the Ice Age design is to target three separate audiences that wouldn't normally play the same game at all. In other words, you're not splitting the playerbase into three, but rather you're combining the playerbases of three very different games and allowing them to interact with each other in a controlled way that promotes, rather than disrupts, each other's gameplay.

However if you have strong feelings about OOC social interaction, there's no reason why you couldn't offer channels where the players of all three factions can communicate OOC using their account names. This would allow the players to chat and offer advice while keeping IC and OOC separate.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Parhelion Hey, look everyone, a smart-ass response that makes little to no sense. Using your logic, I can counter that World of Warcraft is an even larger franchise, with an even closer gameplay model, and people DO roleplay on WoW (there are countless groups devoted to it, in fact).

Uh I disagree that you can roleplay properly on WoW. Roleplay is also subjective. What you consider roleplaying might not be what I consider to be roleplaying. Just like in real life you have actors that think they can act but really can't.

[Will]

Originally Posted by KaVir Only if you assume that the players would normally all be playing together. The point of the Ice Age design is to target three separate audiences that wouldn't normally play the same game at all. In other words, you're not splitting the playerbase into three, but rather you're combining the playerbases of three very different games and allowing them to interact with each other in a controlled way that promotes, rather than disrupts, each other's gameplay.

I hadn't thought of it that way. It's a very cool idea.

[Darren Brimhall]

There was something very simular to what KaVir proposed at Marrach.

It was called 'The Conclave', a very destitute location deep with in Mount Ardan (atop of which the Castle was loocated) where the Castle Disidents (and other undesireables) were sent to. Innitially, those players had their own little world which to play in. But most of those sent there soon returned to the Castle, their players citing lack of RP opertunity with the other characters down there--citing RL issues and those players running 'Alt Characters' up in the Castle, because there was nothing going on in the Conclave plotwise.

These were a highly competant bunch who very likely could have gone on to being StoryGuides and StoryHosts there. But for want of a Coder, who only had to check in on them from time to time to create nessicarry RP objects to make thier plots go, the ideal fizzed.

Eventually most Players either had their characters return to the Castle, and were imprisioned, or the players themselves simply left the Game. Some with imprisoned characters left as well, as they grew tired of waiting for the wheels of justice to start turning. That partictular problem has dogged that Game, along with a host of others.

And when such problems are added up, it comes as no surprise that the place is currently a mess.

Its sad really, very sad.


Darren Brimhall

[RP Kris]

Nothing turns me away from RP in general. I absolutely refuse to play a MUD that isn't truly RP enforced. When I just wanted to play a game for mechanics or combat I will play a console game. If I just wanted that in a multi-player environment I would play an MMORPG. I play MUDs to be a immersed into a story and maybe even play a small part in it.

I've never seen anything close to good RP on a MMORPG. If you think it is out there point me/us to the game, server, and clan. I'd love to take a look. (PM me if you feel more comfortable.)

That being said, I really hate the style of RP on some MU*s. Paragraph long, self centered emotes don't equate to good RP in my opinion. Some of the people complaining about "RP" on this thread are talking about this very style. There are MUDs out there with faster paced RP and I greatly prefer them.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by RP Kris Nothing turns me away from RP in general. I absolutely refuse to play a MUD that isn't truly RP enforced. When I just wanted to play a game for mechanics or combat I will play a console game. If I just wanted that in a multi-player environment I would play an MMORPG. I play MUDs to be a immersed into a story and maybe even play a small part in it.

Ah, see, I'm the opposite. When I want to roleplay, I play a tabletop roleplaying game (I've done live action in the past as well, but that requires a lot more effort and organisation). I guess if I moved to another town and couldn't find a new local group, I might be tempted to play online with a small group of real-life friends, but only as a last resort - and only as a means of communicating, using a private talker rather than a mud.

On the other hand I play muds because I want an online game where I can interact with other players, with mechanics and competitive gameplay, challenges and goals, combat and puzzles.

MMORPGs are muds as well, and I don't really view them any differently from a roleplaying perspective - in my opinion the quality of roleplaying depends on the participants rather than the medium.

But to get back to the original question, which I realise I never really answered: The thing that turns me away from roleplaying on muds is the people and the medium. I like roleplaying with real-life friends, and I like to interact with them in person. Sitting alone in front of a computer and emoting with anonymous strangers really doesn't do it for me.

[dentin]

I know better than to respond to this, but:

I dislike online RP because the rules are arbitrary, inconsistent, and subject to interpretation to a much greater extent than I prefer. I enjoy figuring out complex but well defined systems and seeing what I can do within the bounds of those systems; RP in general is pretty much undefined and free form.

When I want RP, Ill head back to real life, where I can find any number of fully immersive RP scenarios that actually have strong rulesets.

There's a phrase I've heard frequently when reading about developing countries: A government with consistently enforced bad laws is better than a government with inconsistently enforced good laws. That seems appropriate here. I dig consistency.

-dentin

Alter Aeon MUD - An Online RPG

[RP Kris]

Originally Posted by KaVir Ah, see, I'm the opposite. When I want to roleplay, I play a tabletop roleplaying game (I've done live action in the past as well, but that requires a lot more effort and organisation). I guess if I moved to another town and couldn't find a new local group, I might be tempted to play online with a small group of real-life friends, but only as a last resort - and only as a means of communicating, using a private talker rather than a mud. On the other hand I play muds because I want an online game where I can interact with other players, with mechanics and competitive gameplay, challenges and goals, combat and puzzles.

Our difference in preference is ironic considering our mutual love for tabletop RP. Back in college when I couldn't find a good consistent D&D group with the same gaming preferences, I started playing Muds and became hooked. Don't get me wrong. I still tabletop game and enjoy it, but it can't compare to the consistency of a 24/7 Mud.

Thinking about my present tabletop group now, we are supposed to get together weekly and it seems to happen only every two weeks if we are lucky. We also are playing Dresden Files which is alright, but I prefer D&D. I still tabletop because I like my friends, but mudding has been more consistent for me for years.

Originally Posted by KaVir MMORPGs are muds as well, and I don't really view them any differently from a roleplaying perspective - in my opinion the quality of roleplaying depends on the participants rather than the medium.

I do agree that the quality of roleplay depends upon the participants. Along with that though, I've found the key to even a decent RP environment is enforcement by the administration and player base. That is one thing I've found laking on every MMORPG. If your model is to get as many players as you can, RP enforcement isn't going to be at the top of the list. You would have to have a fairly large group of dedicated RP'rs that primarily interacted together to create an immersive RP environment. I know it is possible, but I've yet to find it on any MMORPG.

[RP Kris]

Originally Posted by dentin I know better than to respond to this, but: I dislike online RP because the rules are arbitrary, inconsistent, and subject to interpretation to a much greater extent than I prefer. I enjoy figuring out complex but well defined systems and seeing what I can do within the bounds of those systems; RP in general is pretty much undefined and free form.

Are you talking about MU*s without any solid coding or mechanics in place? If I am interpreting what you say right, you don't like games where the outcome of the game or combat is based solely on RP vs. solid code? I'm not a fan of those games either.

RP and challenging defined gaming systems aren't mutually exclusive, thank goodness. There are games out there with both! It is a matter of finding the right game.

[Suicide Boy]

I believe one of the major problems from which the entire MU* community suffers is cliquishness. If every active MU* (e.g., the top 50 on TMS or MUDstats) were combined into a single uber-MU*, the total population of said uber-MU* would still be lower than that of just a few World of Warcraft servers. In actuality, we're thinly spread across dozens of MU*s. What you end up with are extremely intimate MU* communities populated by rather geeky folks who often exhibit symptoms of Unwarranted (Internet) Self-Importance. Our vastly superior intellects can grasp an all-text game, succeed in the face of typically old-school game mechanics, and triumph against other geeks in the battle for social supremacy, right? Depending on the game, we may also spend sums of real-life money that beggar the imagination for in-game perks.

Escapism is all well and good, but when someone becomes homicidally obsessed with (and/or invested in) their MU* character and his or her e-reputation and e-honor, I can't help but wonder what the rest of their life must be like. Surely it can't be healthy to pour so much energy into an online game. Am I alone in thinking this...? But I digress.

You may be wondering how this relates to "turning people from RP." Simply put, cliques can be a major force in turning people from RP (also from the entire MU*, but not necessarily). Cliques tend to have their own very specific ideas about what constitutes "good" RP; considering that there are many different (and perfectly valid) ways to answer the question "What is RP?", in my mind this is nothing more than preferential elitism.

Now, I'm not talking about clearly bad role-playing. I believe there is indeed such a thing as clearly bad role-playing, and that almost anyone can recognize it as such. For example, everyone reading this post could probably recognize a bad singer in real life: someone who hits sour notes, sings off-key, constantly wavers into falsetto, can't carry a tune, etc. I'm talking about cliques that shun perfectly good role-players who simply don't fit their very particular ideas of good role-playing. This would be like shunning someone for playing a trombone rather than a violin.

And that leads to my next-to-last point, which is twofold: One, that sometimes these elitist cliques' ideas of good role-playing is in fact bad role-playing, the ultimate irony. Two (a significant side note), bad role-playing in and of itself can turn people from RP, because they recognize it as being bad and don't wish to participate in the nonsense.

The cherry on top is that our communities are so small that oftentimes players shunned by the "with it" elitist cliques have nowhere else to turn. Of course, this may lead to someone leaving the game entirely, but not always. They may simply become loners, or "borg" a lot, or hang around with just one or two friends, or be an overall negative (but not bannable) presence on the MU*.

In closing, please try to keep your Unwarranted Self-Importance in check. I freely admit that this applies to myself, too, and that's not self-serving false humility... no one is without sin in this matter.

[Darren Brimhall]

Originally Posted by Suicide Boy I believe one of the major problems from which the entire MU* community suffers is cliquishness. If every active MU* (e.g., the top 50 on TMS or MUDstats) were combined into a single uber-MU*, the total population of said uber-MU* would still be lower than that of just a few World of Warcraft servers. In actuality, we're thinly spread across dozens of MU*s. What you end up with are extremely intimate MU* communities populated by rather geeky folks who often exhibit symptoms of Unwarranted (Internet) Self-Importance. Our vastly superior intellects can grasp an all-text game, succeed in the face of typically old-school game mechanics, and triumph against other geeks in the battle for social supremacy, right? Depending on the game, we may also spend sums of real-life money that beggar the imagination for in-game perks. Escapism is all well and good, but when someone becomes homicidally obsessed with (and/or invested in) their MU* character and his or her e-reputation and e-honor, I can't help but wonder what the rest of their life must be like. Surely it can't be healthy to pour so much energy into an online game. Am I alone in thinking this...? But I digress. You may be wondering how this relates to "turning people from RP." Simply put, cliques can be a major force in turning people from RP (also from the entire MU*, but not necessarily). Cliques tend to have their own very specific ideas about what constitutes "good" RP; considering that there are many different (and perfectly valid) ways to answer the question "What is RP?", in my mind this is nothing more than preferential elitism. Now, I'm not talking about clearly bad role-playing. I believe there is indeed such a thing as clearly bad role-playing, and that almost anyone can recognize it as such. For example, everyone reading this post could probably recognize a bad singer in real life: someone who hits sour notes, sings off-key, constantly wavers into falsetto, can't carry a tune, etc. I'm talking about cliques that shun perfectly good role-players who simply don't fit their very particular ideas of good role-playing. This would be like shunning someone for playing a trombone rather than a violin. And that leads to my next-to-last point, which is twofold: One, that sometimes these elitist cliques' ideas of good role-playing is in fact bad role-playing, the ultimate irony. Two (a significant side note), bad role-playing in and of itself can turn people from RP, because they recognize it as being bad and don't wish to participate in the nonsense. The cherry on top is that our communities are so small that oftentimes players shunned by the "with it" elitist cliques have nowhere else to turn. Of course, this may lead to someone leaving the game entirely, but not always. They may simply become loners, or "borg" a lot, or hang around with just one or two friends, or be an overall negative (but not bannable) presence on the MU*. In closing, please try to keep your Unwarranted Self-Importance in check. I freely admit that this applies to myself, too, and that's not self-serving false humility... no one is without sin in this matter.

Agreed.

Darren Brimhall