What Types of Games Would People Like To See?
-
@ZombieGenesis said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
Third, sometimes I fail.
I also think that we as a MUSH Community often have a very narrow definition of success. Like the only games that have perceived value are ones with a zillion logins like Arx or that run for years and years like Elendor.
If five people showed up to a game and had fun for six months, it's okay to consider that a success. Heck, that's more than some TTRPG groups get out of a campaign. Certainly more than the longevity of your typical PbPost or Storium game.
It's okay to want more. But let's not sell ourselves short either.
-
@faraday I could not agree more. In my eyes the only real failure I've had in a long time if H&V and I've explained why that failed. For the other games I spin up, most last 3-6 months and I have a blast on them. I have no regrets about the "micro-games" I bring up and eventually shut down. That said, the 80s horror game that I've been playing on with those 3-5 people is so much fun that we're actually working on fleshing it out, stabilizing it, and hopefully opening it.
@Ganymede I love collaborating and I've done so with several people on this board on games that I think have gone on to be quite successful! I'd love to work with you sometime to when we get a chance. If you ever have ideas or want to discuss things feel free to PM me.
-
@ZombieGenesis said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
Again, sometimes I fail.
We all fail. I mean look around, we're all on MSB - FAIL!
However here's a suggestion. Instead of asking potential players what we'd be interested in and trying to determine if you can match up, why not tell us what you are interested in making? What are your goals, your limitations, your conditions? Are you into original games or based on existing RPGs? Or canonical settings like Stargate or <insert book fantasy series here>?
No one should expect a game made for free to match their innermost desires but that can help. For example if you have the most fun creating small, niche games then we can avoid asking you to make the Next Big Thing, or if you're into making a larger popular game then we probably won't pitch Gamma World as much.
-
@Herja said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
Now, if we were talking Lenfell, I feel like that would just be me. I love that story world so much. Melanie Rawn is an incredible world-builder even if her unreliability as a writer has made it so that I don't read her work anymore.
22 years this past March. 22 years. I have literally been waiting for the next book for more than half of my actual lifetime. Please just put us out of our misery and tell us you're not writing the last Lenfell book so we can move on, instead of posting every few years that you'll be working on the book soon and thus nudging the dying embers of hope back to a semblance of life!
George R.R. Martin's fans are still playing the waiting game on easy mode.
-
Double your pleasure, double your posts... (to the tune of the Doublemint Gum commercials)
@faraday said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
I also think that we as a MUSH Community often have a very narrow definition of success. Like the only games that have perceived value are ones with a zillion logins like Arx or that run for years and years like Elendor.
If five people showed up to a game and had fun for six months, it's okay to consider that a success. Heck, that's more than some TTRPG groups get out of a campaign. Certainly more than the longevity of your typical PbPost or Storium game.
If I spent a year and a half building custom bespoke systems and doing world-building, then having 7 people have fun for four months would feel like the game was a failure, to me. But if I literally just opened it as a sandbox with minimal code and had 7 people have fun for four months? Worth it.
So my question to myself "was the amount of enjoyment generated by the game greater than the amount of effort which went into building it". And as long as I can answer yes? The game was a success.
(I mean, a zillion logins is not universally a good thing either; it means you can probably always find RP, which is definitely a plus! But as a GM, I can provide way more tailored attention to players' individual stories on a game with 7 regular players than I can on a game with 207 regular players.)
-
@Sparks RIGHT? At this point, I wish she'd just say that she's not writing it, so I can stop looking for it every year or so for any news about it. That series is why I am reluctant to read any multi-book series that hasn't been finished. I made an exception for Game of Thrones and now I'm regretting it.
-
@Sparks said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
If I spent a year and a half building custom bespoke systems and doing world-building, then having 7 people have fun for four months would feel like the game was a failure, to me. But if I literally just opened it as a sandbox with minimal code and had 7 people have fun for four months? Worth it.
Yeah I understand. I keep shooting down my own game ideas because I'm convinced that they won't last past six months and will feel like a failure.
But there are times when I want to smack my inner naysayer upside the head and remind them that if you have fun doing something, and you entertain other people in the process, and you maybe learn something from it that can help future endeavors... why isn't that enough?
-
Idea...
(ALSO, I apologize if I derailed @ZombieGenesis . I didnt mean to imply anything about the # of games you make, but was thinking more along the lines of "How can we find out what a highly desired game is AND ensure some attendance?" Which leads me to...)
...I wonder if we could approach new game ideas with polling? Kind of like a non-paying Kickstarter where you ask players to commit to 30 days of play "if I build this game...?"
So rather than ask "what do players want to play?" it becomes "If I build this shit, are you willing to commit to 30 days of play?"
-
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
-
@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
Lol right.
Mushing is 98% players to 2% coders, so the reason I proposed that idea is that making a mush takes time and effort. Maybe securing commitments to at least trying it out for 30 days will help a game launch.
-
@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
Lol right.
Mushing is 98% players to 2% coders, so the reason I proposed that idea is that making a mush takes time and effort. Maybe securing commitments to at least trying it out for 30 days will help a game launch.
Is this approach something that would help you make a game?
-
@Sunny said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
Lol right.
Mushing is 98% players to 2% coders, so the reason I proposed that idea is that making a mush takes time and effort. Maybe securing commitments to at least trying it out for 30 days will help a game launch.
Is this approach something that would help you make a game?
If I were inclined to make a game? Yes.
I would want to know that the idea was desired and get an idea as to who would pledge to try it out. I'd base the level of interest against the amount of time and effort put into making the game to determine whether or not the effort is worth it.
-
@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Sunny said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
Lol right.
Mushing is 98% players to 2% coders, so the reason I proposed that idea is that making a mush takes time and effort. Maybe securing commitments to at least trying it out for 30 days will help a game launch.
Is this approach something that would help you make a game?
If I were inclined to make a game? Yes.
I would want to know that the idea was desired and get an idea as to who would pledge to try it out. I'd base the level of interest against the amount of time and effort put into making the game to determine whether or not the effort is worth it.
More seriously now - I don't think people know what they want until they see it. On paper something might look like a terrible idea, or a great one, and when you play it it's anything but that.
There's no real way to secure commitments either way. But that's what beta testing and gradually showing what you're doing to a trusted smaller subset of people you know, and whose opinions you respect, comes in; you get feedback and then you act accordingly.
-
@Ghost said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
I would want to know that the idea was desired and get an idea as to who would pledge to try it out. I'd base the level of interest against the amount of time and effort put into making the game to determine whether or not the effort is worth it.
Very sensible approach if the numbers-metric is your primary (which it is, for a lot of folks). Would you do it more as an 'X or Y' question (two things you are interested in, see which sticks more) or 'Would you commit to X for one month?'
-
@Sunny @Arkandel True, I mean even with commitments/pledges there would be no guarantees. Mush interest can be a fickle beast per person as there are plenty of other factors (with varying degrees of importance per individual):
- Who is making the game?
- Who is staffing?
- Is <name of person they don't like> playing/staffing?
- Other stuff.
It's just an idea off of the top of my head, but perhaps I'm thinking in very simple terms. Just a simple: "Hey, I'm making a FARSCAPE game! If I code it using X system and you feel good about who is on staff, are you willing to come give it an honest try?"
I figure if it's 2 yes and 25 no then...go fish? Just simple interest pre-polling but with a slight emphasis on "pre-order".
-
@faraday said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@ZombieGenesis said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
Third, sometimes I fail.
I also think that we as a MUSH Community often have a very narrow definition of success. Like the only games that have perceived value are ones with a zillion logins like Arx or that run for years and years like Elendor.
If five people showed up to a game and had fun for six months, it's okay to consider that a success. Heck, that's more than some TTRPG groups get out of a campaign. Certainly more than the longevity of your typical PbPost or Storium game.
It's okay to want more. But let's not sell ourselves short either.
Number of logins is an incredibly silly way for people to define success, since I think virtually everyone would far rather play a game of 20 people that are enthusiastic and having a wonderful time making stories for one another, than a game of 300 people where everyone hates one another and logs in only out of a grim sense of obligation and habit. I mean sure it can be a benchmark of activity, but I think anyone that's had scenes with the more toxic members of the community can say not all activity is a net plus.
And while I like games that can tell long stories, I just don't see longevity as really a hallmark either. I think HorrorMU's design is brilliant. The games we talk about here are run entirely off of people's enthusiasm and creative energy, and that's a hell of a hard thing to sustain indefinitely. There's nothing wrong with creating something that people want to play, experience, and then do something else. That's not a failure. People are just worried about investing their time and not having a pay off for that investment, by failing to find RP or having fun stories abruptly end, but really as long as people make a good faith effort and a lot of people have a good time, I don't really see what the problem is.
-
@Apos said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
Number of logins is an incredibly silly way for people to define success, since I think virtually everyone would far rather play a game of 20 people that are enthusiastic and having a wonderful time making stories for one another, than a game of 300 people where everyone hates one another and logs in only out of a grim sense of obligation and habit
I'm not saying people should necessarily use activity as a measure of success, I'm saying people do. I know this from comments on forums, comments on games, and comments I've heard first-hand.
And the activity thing is not entirely without basis. As @Sparks said, if you only entertain five people it can feel like the effort wasn't worth it. And as people grow more and more picky about who they're willing to RP with, it requires a wider player base to find someone whose style matches yours.
I prefer smaller games myself, but not everyone does.
-
@Arkandel said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
@Ghost Like there is a ton of potential game-runners/coders able and willing to take input from the masses about where they should invest their time?
I kid - mostly.
Hmm...I am a MUSHing neophyte, but a very experienced coder/sysadmin and world builder. After giving a few of the bigger MUSHes a try, I've decided the best way for me to really get involved is to help build somebody else's. I don't have the required experience staffing/running a game, though, so I don't have the rep/chops to do both. This thread is good, in that it does help...
A Sunrunner game is a really interesting idea, but I'd have to go back and re-read the source novels...it's been...30 years? since I read the first trilogy.
-
How about mixing Yakuza and ninjas into a MUSH, with warring syndicate martial artists and spies and mercenaries?
-
@friarzen said in What Types of Games Would People Like To See?:
A Sunrunner game is a really interesting idea, but I'd have to go back and re-read the source novels...it's been...30 years? since I read the first trilogy.