Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

In the midst of responding about the chat channel vs chat client I got to wondering. Why is it that anytime there is discussion on an RPI topic, people from the genre defend the guidelines (whatever they may be) of that genre as if it is the only way for a roleplay MUD to operate properly? I've seen this with the argument of channels, permadeath, skills, guilds, pk, etc. Anyone know why this is? This isn't a bait tactic, I honestly am baffled by it.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Um. If you are going to bother quoting and responding to my posts, please do so without blowing my content out of context, over-generalizing a concept, and then essentially calling me stubborn. Threshold, I think you're letting you're success as an admin go to your head here, because your response REEKS of "I'm right because I say so."

My use of the word "chat client" included browsers, or any other medium specifically OFF the game.

Your second paragraph flat out ignores my original argument and just restates your original position. Sounds kinda stubborn to me.

Let us agree to disagree. Your position is that games must have an in-game chat channel to have a positive effect, and mine is that they are not necessary and often are not wanted in games that specifically target the kind of audience that this thread was originally made to talk about ("elitist" RPIers). Your games do not attract this particular type of player, and from what I understand, it was never meant to.

Case in point, your logic works fine when you are seeking to appeal to a mass of players who like chat channels. It does not work fine when you try to apply it to a sub-genre that doesn't welcome OOC chatter.



Yes. Stubborn. That's what you call the opposing party in a debate when they continue to disagree with you over what is essentially a topic about personal preferences.


This is an over-generalization.

Yes, the internet is one giant bubbly chat client. Nobody is contesting that here -- and if you read into my posts, you'd see that I actually made a point to say that people are going to use off-game channels regardless.

Saying that an administrator is wrong to say they don't have chat channels simply because their game is on the internet and the internet has messaging capabilities is... well, you know, asinine. This isn't even a valid argument, because "the internet" and a game are not even on the same page.

Again, I (and so far, nobody in this thread) is saying that players do not and would not use internet chat clients like AIM or Facebook to talk off-game. However, you will never be able to exert ANY sort of control over that chatter -- regardless of whether or not your game has a channel or not. If somebody is going to say something they shouldn't say in the game, they're going to use an external channel or ask their friend to use one. The only thing you do by allowing in-game chat is creating the illusion of safety. Until you can publish some real, factual, hard numbers within the scope of this problem by a third party that takes into consideration game type and audience type, I'm not going to be convinced otherwise.


"Subjective"? The entire notion that having a channel is either good or bad for any one particular game is subjective.

I think Jazuela's entire statement was lost on you. It was not to be taken literally, but was an exaggeration to draw the differences between the immersion levels of some "dudes" bull-****tin' around a board and someone who actually has an imagination and has put themselves right into their stories. They are not "looking down" into a village swarmed by goblins, they ARE a goblin.

Again, I suspect Jaz's point was lost on you. :/


You're right. The positions we're all taking is subjective, especially when you try to apply them univerally across all MUDs with roleplaying. However, this thread was started to discuss "veterans of roleplay intensive MUDs." Last time I checked, that meant RPIs. So the scope of this topic has been narrowed.


Let's be honest: this thread was an attempt to troll something Prof1212 or whatever he calls himself around here said in another thread.

This thread is about RPIs. RPIs have a strict set of guidelines that they use to define which games are technically RPIs and which games are not. We're talking about RPI players here -- so, it should be reasonable to conclude that RPI players are going to talk about features that they think are "best" within this context.

People who play RPIs and think they're "best" do so because the level of immersion they personally can experience is close to nil on other games. They don't consider the kind of roleplaying that was described earlier by Jezuela as "reaching into the fridge for a beer while the kobold swarm is descending" really roleplaying. It's more like just... playing.

So the responses you get from RPI players are dependant on what they actually consider roleplaying to be.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Thanks Parhelion. I thought the whole "this has no bearing in reality" was pretty funny actually, since we're talking about swarms of descending kobolds. If New Worlds has kobolds in his real life, descending or otherwise, then we're probably dealing with something a little more significant than game-envy.

Suffice it to say, he did create this thread asking what veterans OF RPIs feel about certain aspects of RPIs. So here's a difinitive answer regarding the OOC channels:

RPIs don't have built-in OOC channels because they don't want them.

There. Next?

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

This is a thread asking for views from veterans of Role-play Intensive MUDs. The better question is why are people who are not veterans, be it staff or players, of Role-Play Intensive MUDs even commenting, much less introducing comments about OOC channels?

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Somewhere, and I thought it was in this thread, but I may be wrong and I'm too lazy to go look for it, I thought someone implied that RPIs are seeing a decline in players, both new and old. The exception appearing to be Attonement which has started out strong, and I believe will likely stay strong if they manage to come up with a good method of attracting new players who might not otherwise pick an RPI. The posts from people who have been associated with that game have been positive and open.

I consider this to be in sharp contrast to many of the people who post in support of RPIs. Way too often, I see posts that have something like "someone who actually has an imagination and has put themselves right into their stories" to describe someone who plays an RPI as opposed to someone who doesn't, which always strikes me as insulting to those who don't play RPIs.

Anyhow, are any of the existing RPIs (lets say that have been live for a year) seen a growth or a decline in their population? Is there an RPI that is noted for drawing in new players? Are there non-RPIs that are roleplaying muds that are noted for drawing in new players and that are growing? It does seem like one problem all RP games have in common is that the longer they are open, the more involved the story becomes and the harder it is for a new player to "catch up". Is anyone dealing well with this issue?

Now, I know some people like to say "our players are better than your players, so it doesn't matter if we have less players you", but that's just noise. Players are what they are and everyone has good ones and bad ones and a lot that fall in between.

Instead of picking at each, maybe if we look at what is working well now, we might be able to adapt and improve the games we play. And yes, all things have to adapt. If you think you have it perfect and aren't willing to consider change, then you are just marking time until the end comes.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Well, I've tried a hell of a lot of games that had RPI labels, and two of them were very good, but I have since learned they don't fit the description of an RPI, so I suppose they are RPI Like not RPIs. Most have been a disappointment. I don't think the concept is bad, but I wonder about the attitude of many who are public advocates of the strict definition of an RPI. I also wonder about the success or failure of them. It is very possible that the reason I've had bad experiences with RPIs is because of my own lack of knowledge of what is expected. It isn't like you can ask for clarification in game if you have a question.

So, yep, I consider myself a veteran. If a game looks promising I'm likely to try it, although at times I feel like the guy who hit his thumb with a hammer and then does it again just to make sure that is what made it hurt the first time.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I can't say for certain from what period each opinion about Moria was made but the comments I mentioned were expressed to me from its opening through 2010. One of the main complaints was that it was too combat-oriented which happens to be one of the biggest problems with RPIs right now. More and more they're emphasizing combat over non-combat aspects.

I checked out your webpage and found the information there severely lacking. Until there's sufficient information regarding the game world and other aspects, I could hardly be expected to give it a fair judgement as to its quality. Rather than prejudice my views by seeing an incomplete game, I chose to defer creating a character until you guys were up and running.

It all comes down to the willingness of the newbies to adapt to the game instead of insisting that the game adapt to them. The latter has been consistently a problem as the RPIs' playerbases grew and they gained more attention and interest from players of other types of games.

Not true. It favors players who are able to fit into the game world more thoroughly. While this may favor veterans over newbies, it also recognizes the contributions of both when they add to the substance of the role-play.

Again, not true. A good staff member shouldn't delegate everything to players. In fact, I'd say that a good admin will always keep a very tight handle on everything that's going on even as players don't realize that they do (I found that out in my first attempt ro run a RPT that I couldn't just let the players carry the RP because they quite often simply don't respond in a logical way). The problem I've seen is two-fold. First, you have lazy and incompetant admins who shouldn't be admins to begin with. Those are the ones who sometimes delegate responsibility for RP out to players when they should be participating, anticipating and reacting to everything that's going on in the game world. When you get admins who really aren't capable or interested in doing so, that's when you have problems. However, working closely with veteran players is valuable because, hopefully (more on this below), veteran players are more capable of moving the role-play along within the context of the game world.

The second problem is the one that I mentioned much earlier in this thread of new players coming in and not attempting to adapt to the game world is the outcome of staff lowering standards for new players. The apathy you mention is not the effect; it is the cause of this problem. The effect is that new players don't succeed or often times even attempt to fit their character into the game world which in turn frustrates veteran players who play the game with the expectation of such conformity with the setting.

To give an example, take Trobridge in Harshlands. You have players there who played it as a democracy and talked about "rights" and other modern concepts. They'd do things that were completely contrary to the game's setting and when veteran players reacted, they'd complain about the reaction they'd receive from those players' characters. Even though simply talking back to a nobleman could get one's tongue cut out, you'd have characters doing it all the time and thinking this was acceptable, then spouting off about how they had "freedom of speech". Not only was their behavior completely inappropriate, their mindset was because in the games' societies such concepts of "freedom of speech" not only have no meaning but have no historical context from which the idea could even be conceived much less acted upon as if it were some political theory.

Staff would often post "do not do this" topics on the forums or inform clan leaders that they were justified in taking action against such behavior but often times the situation simply necessitated staff action. At the heart of the problem though, you had people who rose up to leadship positions who had no business doing so just because they were good at emoting. Emoting is not the only part to role-play but often times the mechanics are all that are looked at. The incident that finally led to me quitting was partially caused by a clan leader who'd been playing the game for at least five years and hadn't realized that peasants were not equal to nobility. How in the name of hell can some one be promoted to clan leadship when they haven't grasped one of the fundamental aspects of the game world's societies? This isn't a case of favoring veterans leading to apathy. It's apathy and a willingness to overlook newbie mistakes leading to compounded incidents of ignorance over time to the point where you eventually have established players who know less than some newbies because they could get away with such ignorance.

Most of the veteran admins that I know ended up that way because they got sick of dealing with two recurring problems: twinks and ignorant players who made constant demands but never carried through on their responsibility to learn and conform to the game world and, secondly, disorganization on the staff side which resulted in numerous and totally avoidable conflicts as well as encouragement of the aforementioned twinks and ignorant players in the name of attracting a bigger playerbase.

The attitude that worries me is the belief that RPIs can or need to be more than a niche genre. When they were a small trio of games which mainly attracted players via word of mouth and the damned best RP that had ever been seen at the time they had less of this problem. Sure, they also had much smaller playerbases but that goes back to my earlier sentiment about one good player being worth more than dozens of poor ones. Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude in RPIs is "more players is better". They're all too willing to lower their standards (even more than they already have) to attract five new players even if it means losing one. They just look at the veteran who quits and says that they should just accept it. But the veteran that gets fed up and quits isn't the problem; their quitting is the symptom of the problem.

That point-of-view is the solution itself. RPIs need to reexamine what made them what they are and then do some soul-searching. They're victims of their own popularity. They've almost become fast food. Players used to complain on SoI if they had to wait ten hours for character approval. Hell, I used to have to wait days for approval of even simple characters when I started playing RPIs back in '99. For my last two characters I spent months designing them. For my last character, even once he was approved I still waited almost a week for the necessary elements for set-up to be finalized and even longer beyond that before fully stepping into the RP. While mine is an extreme example of what I'm talking about, it should be more of a goal for players than getting in as fast as they can. And players who stay in character and react accordingly to the game world should be the ones that staff encourage and emphasize whether veterans or newbies. Players who come in with a cavalier attitude of "I'll do what I want, the way I want, when I want" shouldn't be the norm; they should be the short-lived and ne'er seen again exception. That's how you keep veteran players in the game.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I tend to use the term RPO. There's nothing superior/inferior about them though. Different doesn't mean inferior but some RPI veterans like myself do object to the abuse of the term because it defeats the purpose for which it was coined, namely to identify that particular style of role-play MUD.

I'm reminded of a saying by Theodore Sturgeon in regard to science fiction. "90% of science fiction is crud but, then again, 90% of everything is crud." That includes MUDs. I'd also consider Mr. Sturgeon generous; I'd place the percentage even higher.

We're players who want a specific kind of game, one which employed specific features and emphasized strict in-character RP at a time when most games turned their noses at even semi-strict RP. We came up with a label to identify that particular kind of game and somewhere along the way when in-character RP became not only more acceptable but more emphasized in the MUD community, the term began to be co-opted by more and more games which didn't meet those characteristics.

To date there have been at least (I might be missing one or two as I'm just doing a rough count in my head) a total of 30 RPI MUDs. Of them, only 11 or so of them actually opened to players (even if only in beta). At present there are 4 such games (ie, open to players) and at least 5 more in development.

That, my friend, is exactly why some of us are so adamant about the use and misuse of the term. For the better part of the decade after it was coined, players who knew of the term also knew what to expect. Nowadays more than half the games that identify themselves with the term don't fit that description. But that's another conversation entirely. :-D

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I'm not sure about a decline in players. I have noted over the years a decline in the number of players who matched the quality of those from years past.

Technically speaking, a game which is just starting can't experience a decline in players since they have no past from which to draw data. SoI probably experienced the fastest boom of players that I ever saw from any RPI, exceeding its code-parent MUD, Harshlands, in playerbase within months of opening. That was probably due to several factors not the least of which was that SoI is Tolkien-based and debuted at a time when the LOTR films were fresh on people's minds but also because it had numerous new code features never seen in RPIs prior to that point as well as a more aggressive marketing strategy.

Armageddon and Shadows of Isildur (SoI) have been the two most successful in drawing in new players. I'd even wager that SoI was more so because of its Tolkien setting which at least during my time on staff used to bring in considerable numbers of people who were Tolkien fans and not MUDders.

Threshold and NewWorlds seem, by their posts here and talks I've had with Milawe (of ThresholdMUD), to be growing and drawing in new players.

Yes, there are games that are dealing with that as well as games for which such considerations are minor compared to others. Personally, I think the use of an overarching "story" is a bad thing be it in MUDs, films or television because it makes it difficult to enter at any point other than the beginning or without playing catch-up. Worse, once one has caught up there's always the risk that it wasn't worth the effort (SEE ALSO: Lost). This is especially true in games like RPIs where IC information isn't freely available because of the policy of IC/OOC separation.

Playerbase size doesn't matter. The best RP I've ever found was on a game which had at the time a total playerbase that probably didn't exceed 50 and on which you could rarely find more than 5-6 people. By contrast I've had nothing but horrible experiences on games which boasted a total playerbase of thousands and regularly sported triple figures online simultaneously. This isn't just the case with RPIs or RP MUDs in general; the same goes for good H&S too.

There's different reasons for change. Some are necessary while some are not. Some are positive while others are not. The real key comes to recognizing what changes are necessary and will have a positive impact upon your goals. Further, one needs to examine those goals to see if they are constructive toward what one hopes to achieve.

One problem within the RPI community is that in recent years the goal emphasized more than anything has been playerbase size. However, this hasn't been as important to everyone in the RPI community, particularly those who valued the role-play that existed before such aims became paramount. A larger playerbase is fine but achieving it at the expense of the players you already have and to whom you owe whatever reputation you've thus far achieved might even be called a bit inconsiderate. Of course, no game is obligated to care about such things but likewise no veteran player is obligated to continue playing or have anything good to say about games which don't care.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

This is true and a good point.

This is not true.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

This is a good point. I created this thread in the hopes that something positive would come from it by getting some input from veterans of MUDs I thought we were losing from the community. I actually thought there was a change in the attitude of those who cling to the term RPI and perhaps I could learn something from the group. I was wrong and have only found that the same attitudes exist. Lesson learned. Good luck in your endeavors.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I believe this was done on purpose. Very little information was given so that players could explore the situation without being tainted by external resources. When DF posted about a short story prior to alpha, he posted it with tons of spoiler warnings. Some even posted that they were not going to read the story because they didn't want to spoil the story.

I wrote for small parts of Atonement RPI when they were just about to go into pre-Alpha, and I was given very little information about the storyline itself. I was just given a lot of details about what I was specifically writing. I definitely understood that our parts were segregated pretty heavily in order to preserve that lack of information and mystery. I was very intrigued by this way of story-building and have always been very interested in the way Atonement was presented. It seemed out of the norm and actually pretty newbie friendly. Everyone goes in with an equal lack of information which seems to even the playing field.

Ultimately, and I could be very wrong here, I think that we're ignoring the biggest factor in why older muds in general (RPI, RPE, Hack n Slask, etc.) have seen a decline in playerbase is because our playerbase is getting older. As the playerbase gets older, a lot of people disappear for no reason other than real life gets in the way big time. And when real life comes knocking in a serious way, things that we once loved a great deal begin to show their flaws, and a lot of us remember the glory days of when we could play without many distractions and when the headaches were worth it. I know that as I get older and more responsibilities get shoveled onto my shoulders, I'm less patient with anything I do for entertainment. When movies suck, I'm more ready to leave. When games suck, I give them less of a chance. RPIs are already extremely demanding environments, and perhaps, when you have less time to play and less time to be immersed because your boss is screaming in your ear (as opposed to hanging out in a computer lab until 5 am), that one dude going OOC is about 1000% times more annoying than he used to be. Many of the established RPIs out there are pretty old, so I would assume the playerbase has been around for nearly as long.

Just a thought that has nothing to do with game design or a degradation in the community.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

You're absolutely right. Please return to bashing the muds we are still playing and and enjoying, unfettered. There's no reason why we should have any objection to you putting forward the idea that when - you - and Delerek,, that pillar of RP, played these games they were wonderful. They were in their heyday. But not you're gone and they suck. And worse still they all unrealistically offer female characters, not to mention female players more interesting role choices than just blow up sex toy, or the tired cliche of the spider who takes power though a man too stupid to know he's been manipulated. If only the two of you would hurry up and finish building the only real and valid RPI's that will ever exist. Please. Hurry.

Absolutely. Sorry for interrupting. As you were.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

You're not really a big fan of RPI's are you? Did it really not occurr to you that soliciting opinions with people who left because they were unhappy was slanted to show RPI's in the worst possible light?

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Yeah, but Par and Prof haven't really left. They left specific RPIs, but they're both involved in projects of their own that are RPIs. I think they're disillusioned with specific GAMES just as many people get over time.

Honestly, the stuff that came up is just general arguments over game design issues. You just have a lot of people convinced that they are right because they have seen specific mechanics work on specific games. Again, it boils down to an argument about the quality of RP to be found on certain games, and that's always personal. :)

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Exactly. They have their own Agenda.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

They still fight the good fight for RPIs in general. :) That's why there's all these arguments!

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I don't think saying that all the open RPI's now suck and have declined is fighting the good fight.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I'm a fan of the MUD genre regardless of genre. I'm not a fan of the term RPI, I think it lame, but that's not this discussion. My point was to help veterans of the genre return and voice opinions on what could bring them back into the genre and MUDing.

Whether I believe Armeggedon or Shadows of Isildor completely blow or not is irrellevant. But consider this: I have recommended both of those games to other players seeking such. I have also recommended numerous game genres not like NWA for those who seek these genres. Can you say the same of these folks? Not bloody likely.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

If veterans of the game wanted to return, I'm sure they'd manage to figure out a way, without the "help" of someone who spends an inordinate amount of time criticizing the genre and nitpicking its name.

Your point was to get your name, and therefore the name of your game, on each of the "most recent posts" lists on the main page of TMS. This is what you do every 10 days or so, it's a pattern that regular viewers don't fail to notice. You're not fooling anyone.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I absolutely cannot say the same. That's very kind of you to point people who might enjoy games you don't play to those games anyway. Thank you.

That said, this particular thread began to imply that RPI's were in a decline. And when people pointed out that the statements made were opinions not facts they were told they were in the wrong thread. That's an issue.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I understand this point but do not see it at NWA. If anything our playerbase (a roleplay enforced game or RPE) is growing not shrinking.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Oh my gosh. Paranoid much? If I could post anonymously to prove you wrong I would. I enjoy TMS. I enjoy the MUD community. I enjoy promoting many of the good MUDs here not just NWA. This kind of accusation is simply argumentative and spiteful.

Oh incidentally, I post probably about every other day or so. Where have you been?

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

That is an issue, I agree. I hope I was not one that did so. I certainly want discussion and information and even opinion, but not negative innuendo.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Of all the games we're discusisng, I believe that NWA is the newest one. In addition, I think you did a "relaunch" recently or perhaps you came out of Beta. Some of these games have been running for over a decade. The playerbase grew up with many of these games and new demands came of their time. On our game alone, we've got people who have disappeared because they got married, had kids (most common), or have gone through a lot of personal tragedy. I think real life gets in the way for older games more than we know a lot of times. I recently talked to a player who came back after being gone for nearly five years. She left to raise her son who is now old enough not to need so much hands-on attention anymore.

Just last year, we found out that one of our players who had not been logging on had been killed in the war. Threshold alone has suffered the loss of several players to death. When you've been around long enough, you lose dedicated players in the oddest, and sometimes worst, ways.

Perhaps games are loser their players to crappy game design or administrative changes. I don't know. I just think the pressures of "growing up" can cause players to be less patient with a game. :)

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Perhaps you are right. NWA has only been around this century (2000+) and did a playerwipe 2 years ago which was quite massive. So it is true we aren't really in the same starting point as some of the games that began in the big era of MUDS.

How cool is it though to say your game has been around since last century.:)

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

It's unfortunate that these threads always turn into this. There are some inciteful posts here, and some that should be forgotten.

A) To Prof: You and I just have different generations of opinion on how to re-create a vital RPI and maintain a high quality of roleplay. Anyone who knows me knows that story and roleplay are not to be compromised for marketing reasons, in my opinion. I can accept our difference of opinions, and hope that your game is successful when it releases.

B) To TH and NW: There's no need to bash difference of opinions on game-design elements such as whether or not to have an OOC chat channel in-or-out of client. It's obvious that the players who frequent RPIs tend to like this approach to design, for whatever the reason may be. I can accept that it's a clear distinction from your style of RP-Game and mine.

C) To Everyone: Chill out a bit, okay? Do folks not realize that most players/admins from both genres of RP-MUDs see each other in -exactly- the same way? RPI players are less outspoken on these forums, generally, but they still feel the same way. Personally, making blanket statements about another genre of players/admins for either side is just a complete let-down; I respect logic and reason. That's all that I can say about that.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I never thought of it that way!

Hopefully, you didn't take what I said as some sort of "your opinion doesn't matter here" just because your game is newer. I was just thinking it may be why you had not encountered as much of the whole "real life just gets in the way" thing yet though I'm sure that you've seen some already.

Games like NWA, Atonement RPI, and Maiden Desmodus show me on a daily basis that the mudding world isn't dying and that new games can have great success. It gives me hope that any new games we come up with will be worth making because there are players still looking for good games and fun worlds. :D

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree, but I want to clarify my position since the way you are perceiving it is incorrect. My point is that every single MUD effectively does have OOC chat channels whether they want to admit it or not. The various forms of IM are too pervasive now.

Given the above fact, my *OPINION* is that having them in game serves as a pressure valve to partially address the need while keeping it under some degree of enforcement/reasonableness. It also helps keep people immersed in the game since they aren't tabbing out and getting so distracted by their out-of-client chatter that they completely miss what is going on IC.

People who choose to design, make, or play muds without them are not making a dumb, bad, or inferior choice.

Not so fast, my friend! :)

Laying absolute claim to the acronym RPI is already a hotly contested debate. But you certainly can't also lay claim to the phrase "roleplay intensive" for Armageddon Style MUDs.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

The only Armageddon style mud I've ever heard of is Armageddon. And even that isn't truly an Armageddon-style mud, since the original Armageddon was a hack-n-slash, which converted itself into an RPI after the fact. However, the codebase of Armageddon does pattern itself after Diku and in fact has sprung off from diku, with many enhancements. I don't believe Shadows of Isildur uses the same codebase, or the same crafting system, SoI has an entire OOC AREA of the game where Armageddon does not. In Harshlands, I believe it is acceptable to treat NPCs walking around in the street as "mobs" whereas in both SoI and Armageddon this is not acceptable.

So what game is like Armageddon, that there would be Armageddon-style games, of the plural variety?

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I think you know what I meant, as does everyone else. I am not a pro or anti-RPI zealot, so there's no need to get aggressive or take offense.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

If memory serves, I think we started using the ARM style games annotation because ARM was the first of that genre that used the styles most of the others ended up following. Hence the usage of an ARM MUD vs. an RPI.

I'd hate this thread to turn into another RPI argument session, though I think it already has.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Not at all, I understood exactly what you meant and took no offense. And yes, I've seen some of what you describe.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I recommended Shadows of Isildur to an individual new to MUDing no more than 48 hours ago.

I later recommended he check Armageddon MUD, Accursed Lands (non-RPI), and Iron Realms (which I actually actively boycott) because I believe he may find them fun.

I do recognize that not everyone agrees with my definition of fun; however, I stand by my opinions voiced during the "are chat channels necessary" discussion because I have yet to be handed the research I requested.

Your sly attempt of going, "Teehee, I'm better than the are!" just failed. Good try, though.


Hehehe. I got a chuckle out of this simply because someone else said almost this very thing to me about NWA's postings this morning in an off-topic discussion.


Some people don't need to proverbially hear the sound of their own voice to know they are contributing to the community as a whole.


It's probably because it's 2am, but I didn't quite understand this statement.

Due to my work with the RPMud Network, I have come to accept the definition of "RPI" to mean a game that meets certain qualifiers: as such, I am going to continue promoting that definition. That definition does, in fact, include Armageddon-Styed MUDs. (I would like to a list of qualifiers, but I'm posting against the clock! -- Laptop battery is dying fast.)


The term as it is most popularly pushed does not refer to the codebase.

It actually refers to a set of criterion that MUDs must meet. What that criteria IS precisely is what is most often debated, because many MUDs "almost" make the list and then debate the points on which they fall short. The term suffers mostly because it became synonymous with "success", when it actually has nothing to do with that.

An example of criteria includes a total lack of OOC channels (thus the channel debate); pure/mandator permadeath; involved character applications; etc...

And again, I will admit that I personally will continue to push that set of criteria, as there is no sense in trying to dilute it or change and make MUD categorization more "nebulous" or confusing as it already is. There are other ways to describe other types of games (such as RPE, or the token recently introduced by Proff "RPO" to describe RP MUDs that have been heavily modified to be unique but have a different feature set than the RPIs).


EDITED -- I managed to catch up on this thread with some time to spare, so I went and grabbed the current list of features which would be required for any game to be categorized as an "RPI" on the RPMud Network. (And yes, since this site is outside of that network, no one is required to follow them or even acknowledge them here... but when I say "RPI", this is what I mean.)

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Couple of things Parhelion.

1st, you should probably post when you are awake. Your posts are long and many times nonsensicle, especially when you are half awake.

2nd, Posting that you recommended a few Muds from RPI Network isn't what I'm talking about. My meaning was that all of the games I have recommended that are RPIs have never recipricated over the years. There was no "tee hee" involved. Grow up a little, kay.

You didn't understand this statement from Threshold because you likely didn't read the massively huge threads on this very topic. As a member of the RPMUD Network Operating Committee you should familiarize yourself with these threads as every thing you said below this statement has been stated many many times and argued many many times and few of us want to see the argument or argue with you again about it.

I could be wrong, their may be those that do wish to bring up this tired subject again, but I'm not one of them. If you need the thread links for your perusal, here they are:

1. This thread was a beginning argument on the term RPI and went haywire:


2. This thread was an attempt to discuss the term:


3. This thread was a spoof on the entire topic:


Enjoy the reading it will make you laugh, cry, and hurl.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Oh my, was that an attempt at an insult?

I prefer making a long post that addresses quotes in the order that they appeared in the thread, as opposed to making numerous singleton replies like SOMEBODY else in this thread, which accomplishes nothing except boosting post count.

Sorry, there was a "tee hee" involved, but you obviously didn't get the sarcasm.

To begin with, I did not recommend MUDs to a player because they are from the RPMud Network. If you had payed attention to my post at all, you will have noticed I mentioned some games for which there are no plans (to my knowledge) to include in RPMud's listings. Furthermore, I made a point to explain that I actually detested one group of games (IRE's) and STILL recommended it because your original post was worded in such a way as to insinuate that you take the high road and we (Prof and myself) do not. This is an attempt at staining our characters without any basis.

I've been encouraged to be blunt, so I shall, since this parade goes on across several threads. To all the innocent readers out there, I'm going to apologize ahead of time. Please excuse the teeth.

Newworlds, you make an active attempt to defame RPIs every opportunity you get through what you probably consider are clever methods. Furthermore, anytime the RPMud Network comes up, you -generally- have something rather acidic to say, and you word your posts in such a way as to insinuate that all members of the RPMud Network committee all act and think the same way. You clap your hands with "Way to go!"s when directly addressing someone, but you're still virtually sneering while you do it.

You have some weird issue with Prof. I get it. He's an RPI nerd, and you're butt-hurt that he tends to engage you in ways that you don't like. Although I have been a long-time member of this community for several years, my recent involvement with RPMud Network, and my subsequent promotion of it, has led you to spew drivel about my bias activities at least twice now -- even though my posting activity has not been particularly high the past, and my broader social network is mostly made up of developers of H&S and RPE games. Not that you'd know, of course. Your opinion on the entire group is based on the activities of Prof and myself, as we are prolific posters and we both tend to personally favor RPIs -- but if you actually stopped and bothered to look into the committee, you'll find most of its members don't even LIKE RPIs. As a whole, we are trying to represent all roleplaying games, including RPE games, and MUSHs, MUCKs, and other MU*s.

While I understand that things like this are not immediately clear because we do not yet have an active internet presence, I'm quite honestly getting tired of you trying to pop holes in a legitimate attempt at community building -- an attempt that YOU could actually benefit from -- just because you don't like Prof.


No. I did not understand the statement from Threshold because it didn't make grammatical sense to me. I am well aware of the RPI Debates and their contents -- if you expect me to follow every little tidbit sewn by yourself and Threshold, you're mistaken. He's a good admin, but I've got better things to do with my time than hang onto his -- or your -- every word on every thread ever.


Originally Posted by Threshold
"But you certainly can't also lay claim to the phrase "roleplay intensive" for Armageddon Style MUDs."

Since you and he both seem to be confused on you use MUD terms, I'll help you out:
Acronym: R P I
Meaning: RolePlaying Intensive
Thread Title:"Veterans of Roleplaying Intensive MUDs"

So yes. When the acronym is accepted to mean a certain thing, it STILL means that certain thing even when you spell it out.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

As many threads dealing with RPIs have gone in the past, so has this one. I'll be bowing out now, because I don't believe that this thread will return to being on-topic, and because I don't have the patience for another admin flame war.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I think I will join you in your exit. I thought to respond with a long rebuttle but it is clear to me that no reasonable discussion on this topic can be had.

I will make one comment though. Proph1515 and DonathinFrye, the previous poster insinuated that I was trying to defame RPI's and I have something against you personally. This thread and my comments here were not meant in any way to defame, insult, or demean you or your games in any fashion.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I like pudding on my RPIs. Chocolate. With sprinkles.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I have to say it again:

Not so fast, my friend! :)

Newworlds speaks for himself, and himself alone. He doesn't speak for me, we aren't a "team", and we don't even agree on a lot of things related to this issue. If you want to debate a point I have made, I'm happy to read what you have to say and possibly be educated or have my mind changed. I simply ask that you think of me as my own person with my own views, not part of a cabal.


Aw shucks. *blush* Thank you. :)

I know what the terms mean. I also know that the RPI/ARM folks consider those acronyms to refer to a very specific, very rigid set of game features. But trying to lay claim to the spelled out words themselves strikes me as a bit delusional and excessive.

Out of respect for people to whom "RPI" has a very specific meaning, I do not call or an RPI. But if asked, I would definitely describe both games as roleplay intensive. I would not appreciate someone saying "you can't say your games are roleplay intensive, to use that phrase you have to have game features X, Y, and Z." Telling me I cannot use two basic words that do in fact accurately describe my games would be totally illogical and inappropriate in my view.

I should add that I would shy away from the phrase "roleplay intensive" anyway. Not because I agree that those 2 words used together require a certain set of features, but because I make games to bring happiness to people - not to score points in ancient, drawn out arguments that have unnecessarily divided our community.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Only if its vanilla RPI.

With crushed oreos.


And to Threshold, I want to apologize for dragging you into my last post; my primary objective was to address Newworlds and publicly call out some of his... what I shall call, "bull****"... that often gets spread around these forums in one way or another. In particular, the very end portion of my post was unnecessarily venomous.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Why don't you and Threshold just kiss and make up? Maybe you will make him blush again (gag). I held back from getting involved even when Delerak suddenly returned from the madhouse and Jazuela came out of the closet, but who needed them when we now have emo girl? New Worlds, don't listen to this babbling idiot. She didn't read the old threads at all or she wouldn't be spewing her own BS from the apple box. She is just angry that the roleplaymud network is a group of haters and want all to hate in kind. Next time you want to spew forth your ideas please utilize facts instead of RPI promotional dung.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

You're kidding, right?

Looking back at your posts, 80% of them are hating on Brody and Otherspace or other people. If you want to talk about facts, you should learn some. RPMud consists of a New Worlds player and a Threshold player as well. Both of those are not RPI muds. In fact, the admins of both of those games tend to take an opposing stance in game design to a lot of traditional RPI game mechanics and theories.

Seriously, New Worlds would be dumb to take your advice. It's never smart to not listen to anyone whose posts consists of calling someone an "babbling idiot","emo girl", and gagging because people decided to play nice instead of flaming the snot out of each other. Sorry, you don't run a successful mud by being dumb.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Why would I be kidding? Everytime these people begin flinging their rpi crap, flame wars ensue. Why do you think that is? When you play nice with idiots you become an idiot. That is why I suggested to ignore emo girl. Which is good advice.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I could almost be convinced to agree with you except they didn't start this thread. I wouldn't go as far as to suggest New Worlds was setting out flame bait, but surely, the pattern has been established for long enough that we all knew where this thread would go.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Hey, I don't supposed you'd go into a little detail about what mechanics and theories those are? I'm rather curious.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

Good luck to you on your game as well. I'll eventually give it a look when it's open but you won't know it's me. It'll probably be for the purpose of a review for RPMUD or something. :-D

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I actually didn't think this particular thread would start a flame war as it was originally about previous veteran gamers. But really, I wish this arguing would stop. It is childish and that is all I will say. I don't agree with Anjanis but I don't disagree either other than to say name calling isn't needed. Parhelion has their own agenda I'm guessing.

Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs
 

I've been very sporadic at looking in on this thread because it's meandered too much from the original topic. The original post was inquiring about the views of veterans of Role-Play Intensive MUDs. It wasn't about what constitutes "hard" fantasy. It wasn't about whether or not one likes OOC channels. It wasn't about any of that crap. The reason the thread began to have problems is because it diverged from the topic about which it was posted and people who weren't veterans of Role-Play Intensive MUDs decided to toss their views in. No offense to anyone but if you're not a veteran of RPIs, why reply to this thread?

Want to keep threads from turning into flame wars? Here's a simple bit of advice:



Saw what happened to them? That's what happens to too many threads when people don't take Gold Leader's advice.