Make it fun for Me!

[surreality]

I think the sporting competition thing is not the best analogy for a MU*. I do agree that it does have 'rules of the road' re: good sportsmanship, however, in the same way a MU* does.

Some of the shittiest behavior I've seen on games I'd attribute to a lack of good sportsmanship, and what I ultimately consider 'bad faith'.

You can almost guarantee that any time someone is called on crappy behavior (barring 'the staffer calling them on it is Elsa-grade nuts') and their comeback is, "But there's no rule against that!" they're acting in bad faith; they're adhering to the letter of the law to avoid getting in trouble, but they're absolutely trying to be as crappy as possible to others while avoiding any repercussions for themselves.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

MUs are social games.

This is a basic and obvious statement, but I feel like the failure of players to grasp this, or to really internalize it, is at the heart of a lot of non-fun in this hobby. You cannot one-shot this shit. You cannot do it in a corner by yourself. At least, not in any long-term or with any amount of depth. You 'win' these games by telling the best story, and sometimes that means ceding the stage to someone else or taking a loss that dramatically rich down-the-line. These are not the first instincts of most people and we aren't good at it, so we fail to 'win' a lot of the time. Gotta keep in mind what the win is and keep trying, though. You attain the happy medium when you find GMs and RP partners who trade off the load and let everyone share in winning/the best story. This is the ideal I feel like we should all strive for. It's hard some days. Gotta try and be better, though, because that's the only way this works.

[Roz]

@icanbeyourmuse said in Make it fun for Me!:

@the-sands I'm not entirely certain I agree with that. It might be competitive but they have agreed upon rules, times, and places. They have agreed upon codes of conduct. Yeah, they are competing to 'win the game' but they are working together, in a way, with each other and their teammates.

A competition having rules and codes of conduct doesn't make it any less of a competition.

[The Sands]

@icanbeyourmuse said in Make it fun for Me!:

@the-sands I'm not entirely certain I agree with that. It might be competitive but they have agreed upon rules, times, and places. They have agreed upon codes of conduct. Yeah, they are competing to 'win the game' but they are working together, in a way, with each other and their teammates.

I think you're confusing 'competing' with 'outright warfare'. 'Compete' means to 'strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same.' It doesn't mean there's no rules. I will admit that 'compete' is not the absolute antonym to 'collaborate' but collaborate carries at the very least a strong implication of people working together toward a common goal. If every player in the game was interested in entertaining then I suppose a game of hockey could be viewed as collaboration but I am almost certain that some of those players are only concerned about winning and don't care how 'entertaining' they are.

[faraday]

@three-eyed-crow said in Make it fun for Me!:

You 'win' these games by telling the best story, and sometimes that means ceding the stage to someone else or taking a loss that dramatically rich down-the-line.

Yes, this +100.

And I think this is where platforms like Storium have an edge over MUs and their RPG-drenched history. Because let's face it - the goal in an RPG isn't to tell a good story. It's to win. Level up. Get better gear. Defeat the Big Bad and be a Big Damn Hero doing it. That mentality is largely incompatible with a persistent 24/7 world that lasts for months and involves dozens of strangers.

Storium has its flaws (serious flaws) but the thing I really like about it is the emphasis on the story. When you overcome a challenge, you win control of the story. A chance to temporarily steer it in the direction you want. And the very nature of the game forces you to use both strengths and weaknesses in meeting those challenges.

[Thenomain]

@faraday

whispering: Bartle Types.

That is, this is me reminding everyone that people "win" at games for different reasons. Griefing is the opposite of @Three-Eyed-Crow's "telling the best story", and is how some people win.

Some people should go get stuffed, mind you, but there's no rule against griefing someone else's story. You can't tell me that this isn't the best story; who are you to tell me how to tell stories! (etc. etc.)

I know and agree wholeheartedly with what you two are getting at, but it still openly allows people to be selfish and get away with it within the rules. We in the WoD arena have been dealing with this since almost quite literally day one.

[surreality]

@thenomain said in Make it fun for Me!:

there's no rule against griefing someone else's story. You can't tell me that this isn't the best story; who are you to tell me how to tell stories! (etc. etc.)

This, exactly, is what I mean by 'bad faith'. That's beautifully put.

The tl;dr to me has always been 'act in good faith'. That's essentially my personal translation of 'don't be a dick'. (I would ramble about proactive vs. prohibition on this, but I already invoked tl;dr.)

[Thenomain]

@surreality

Well even "good faith" is iffy. It's why I'm grooving the vibe of "good sportsmanship".

The idea that the game trumps staff and players alike has been with me for a while now, and the more often these conversations come up, the more I believe this. Staff and players inform and facilitate gameplay, but the game is the thing that you are playing. It works best when everyone can agree on what it is.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@thenomain said in Make it fun for Me!:

That is, this is me reminding everyone that people "win" at games for different reasons. Griefing is the opposite of @Three-Eyed-Crow's "telling the best story", and is how some people win.

Sure, but I think this is a class that's going to be pretty dissatisfied by cooperative MUs that don't have a heavy PvP element (games, for the record, which I don't play often enough to comment on them much). Playing the game you're on, not the game you want it to be, is part of what having fun with the game entails.

[surreality]

@thenomain The reason I steer away from sportsmanship is that it implies adherence to 'the rules' (including 'avoiding fouls'), and a lot of the worst actions are entirely permissible within the scope of the rules of a game -- but they're shitty things to do to a fellow player that common decency should dictate one does not do.

It's entirely within the rules of most games to be that jerk who kills a newbie for sitting on their favorite barstool over and over and over again, but it's a pretty profoundly crap thing to do to a fellow player. Many players who engage in this behavior trot out the 'the rules say you're dead now, byeeeeeeee!' and accusations of bad sportsmanship on the part of the person they just screwed over if they don't suck it up with a smile, because technically speaking, not adhering to the rules is part of the very definition of bad sportsmanship -- which is also shitty, as it is piling on shaming and abuse, insult added to injury.

I think, essentially, 'more than just following the rules is required of people to make this work' needs to be flagged in some respect, and a proactive 'act in good faith' works nicely for this.

[Sonder]

"But it's what my character would do" can be a slippery one to contend with as well.

[ixokai]

@surreality To me the issue with 'act in good faith' is I can't really tell, often, what's inside your head or if you're acting in good faith or not.

I can absolutely see dick and point it out though.

[Ganymede]

@the-sands said in Make it fun for Me!:

As deep and philosophical as that is, hockey is still a competition and not a collaboration (with the other team).

My initial point is that you can be both competitive and collaborative. These are not mutually-exclusive concepts.

Others have already made my counter-argument, but, to be succinct, the game has rules everyone agrees to play by. When those rules are breached, there are penalties. Penalties tilt the competition in favor of the non-offending party, so there is a benefit to play by the rules that the teams, before the game, agree to.

But even if you don't agree that this is collaborative, at the very least the sportsmanship element sticks. People drop gloves and punch each other in the face, but they don't engage in snarky off-game attacks and shit, as we sometimes see in this damn hobby. And most of them don't bitch and whine at the officiating.

If you don't believe one can be competitive and collaborative, let me take a moment to explain how the practice of law works nowadays.

[Roz]

@ganymede said in Make it fun for Me!:

@the-sands said in Make it fun for Me!:

As deep and philosophical as that is, hockey is still a competition and not a collaboration (with the other team).

My initial point is that you can be both competitive and collaborative. These are not mutually-exclusive concepts.

Others have already made my counter-argument, but, to be succinct, the game has rules everyone agrees to play by. When those rules are breached, there are penalties. Penalties tilt the competition in favor of the non-offending party, so there is a benefit to play by the rules that the teams, before the game, agree to.

But even if you don't agree that this is collaborative, at the very least the sportsmanship element sticks. People drop gloves and punch each other in the face, but they don't engage in snarky off-game attacks and shit, as we sometimes see in this damn hobby. And most of them don't bitch and whine at the officiating.

If you don't believe one can be competitive and collaborative, let me take a moment to explain how the practice of law works nowadays.

This is all well-said. I mean, we all know that there are players in professional sports who are respected for not just playing well but behaving well. And there are players who may play well but are known to be assholes in the game. You can absolutely be a respectful competitor.

[faraday]

@thenomain said in Make it fun for Me!:

That is, this is me reminding everyone that people "win" at games for different reasons.

Yes, but my point is that some of those forms of "winning" are IMHO very poorly suited to the type of environment posed by MUs. (Others may disagree.)

It's like... I can be a competitive over-achiever by nature, but that's a crappy mentality to take to an improv acting troupe, right? If I always have to be the star of the show, my character always has to come out on top... that would be super-obnoxious, wouldn't it? That's all I'm saying here.

@Three-Eyed-Crow said, "You 'win' these games by telling the best story", but the key word in that sentence is story, not best. Different people will disagree with what resolution is "best", and there needs to be some way to resolve that. But when the focus is on the story and not on any one player's individual player-centric goals, then everyone wins.

Which I don't think is very different from your statement that "the game trumps staff and players alike". Because what is the game if not a collective story?

@surreality said in Make it fun for Me!:

The reason I steer away from sportsmanship is that it implies adherence to 'the rules' (including 'avoiding fouls'), and a lot of the worst actions are entirely permissible within the scope of the rules of a game

I actually have the opposite view of good sportsmanship. It goes beyond the rules and is more of the "good faith" notion that you're describing. Shaking hands and saying "good game" after the game has nothing to do with the rules and everything to do with being a good sport. Adhering to the spirit of the game (i.e. in hockey, don't do anything to hurt your opponent) more than the letter of the rules ("But that wasn't technically a slash, ref") is being a good sport.

[Arkandel]

To me it's pretty simple; not everyone's playstyle is everyone else's favorite. Some of us like and prioritize some things (combat, mystery and horror, romantic/sexual tropes, writing styles and responsiveness, etc) different than others do.

In fact we've discussed most of those in great length in other threads right here.

As such we'll indeed go and find some fun playing with those whose strengths are in the same areas we enjoy. There's nothing wrong with any of this as long as we also don't go out of our way to be assholes to folks who just like different playing styles.

You'd think that's a low bar but it's not. How many times have we seen someone complain here that other people are locked in rooms together, heavily implying they are having teh tee-es, and being annoyed about it? How many times have we seen others shit all over a canon character out of entitlement? How dare they play Batgirl as a happy-go-lucky crime-fighter instead of a brooding uber-hacker? It's ruining everything!

It's a big hobby. Many different interpretations of fun fit within it, and maybe we just need to back off others, stop worrying as much about what entertains them and concern ourselves with our own sense of enjoyment.

[Kanye Qwest]

This doesn't have to be so polarizing. When I said to players of Arx to consider what was fun for those around them, I never said "at the expense of all your own fun" or meant for anyone to be a doormat. But what I saw a lot of were complaints, both direct and aimless, that people have a hard time getting involved, or that other players seem to misunderstand them or avoid scenes with them. At which point it's like...ok, if you find that people don't seem to want to be around you, have you tried being fun to be around?

[Ganymede]

@kanye-qwest said in Make it fun for Me!:

...ok, if you find that people don't seem to want to be around you, have you tried being fun to be around?

[SG]

@arkandel said in Make it fun for Me!:

To me it's pretty simple; not everyone's playstyle is everyone else's favorite.

For sure. I've had people flip out at me because my pose style usually includes snippets of backstory and narrative to explain some of the references I use, but some people are very firmly into the only write physical actions that poeple would see and hear and nothing else.

[Arkandel]

@sg said in Make it fun for Me!:

For sure. I've had people flip out at me because my pose style usually includes snippets of backstory and narrative to explain some of the references I use, but some people are very firmly into the only write physical actions that poeple would see and hear and nothing else.

That's what bugs me. The only legitimate reason to complain to someone is if they are actually doing something bad - meaning they are harassing others or trying to metagame or cheat or whatever. That's it, there's no other good reason to do it.

I have lots of peeves. We all do - I don't think you can MUSH for a long time without being irked at some particular gamestyle, or even all of them except for your own thing, and there's nothing particularly wrong with it.

For example I love flowery purple prose, but I'm well aware that's not for everyone; if I choose to not play with (generic) you very often because you prefer short prose that's completely my choice and we don't need to be mortal enemies! It's just... a thing. On WoW if you like raiding and I'm a PvPer we can still be in the same guild, or maybe do a 5-man together once in a while - no big deal.

If however I make a point of frowning at you for posing like that then I'm just an asshole.