@ixokai You're a regular on MSB and you're worried about being judged? 
@arkandel said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@ixokai You're a regular on MSB and you're worried about being judged?
Actually, yes.
I know you're sorta joking, but seriously, no joke.
There's a relationship you set up between you and a game, between you and staff, between you and other players.
Little things bug me.
I played on the 100 and really enjoyed it, but every sunday the "most cookies this week" would post, and I'd feel this weird pressure-judgement feeling that was unpleasant.
To not feel this little unpleasant feeling, I'd go in for the big scenes that I don't enjoy or feel good doing, but, the little pleasant feeling at the end of the week when I rank on the rankings, positive!
I'm as susceptible as anyone to feedback loops, but I'm a LOT more sensitive to the feedback that is closer. If staff puts itself into a position as Judge of you being Good Enough, this is a relationship that my personal experience says leads to an environment that is both hostile and unpleasant.
The distant (removed from being immediately accountable?) judgment of MSB is a different thing. I can look at MSB judgment with a grain of salt and in a different context then I look at my relationship with staff on a game I play.
Ya'll have no authority over me: the extent of your power is to not like me. Whatever. I don't like you either. If I play a game, I submit to their rules. If the staff begins that situation as gatekeeper, protector, we're good. If they begin that situation as judge and controller, nopenopenopenope.
I have my hangups like anyone here.
@ixokai Fair enough. And without knowing what The 100's cookies are, I kinda get the vibe it's one of those systems I always thought typically turned out to be massive circle jerks.
About applications and MG specifically, I think it could be useful to staff not to see if a player is "good enough for a character but rather to ensure they can roleplay their way out of a paper bag. Some iffy players can be avoided, yet I imagine if Magneto or someone others should be gravitating around is a terrible player then it can have an impact on the MU* as a whole.
@arkandel said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
@ixokai Fair enough. And without knowing what The 100's cookies are, I kinda get the vibe it's one of those systems I always thought typically turned out to be massive circle jerks.
The 100 was FS3, and cookies were basically 'votes that grant at most "luck" and so benefit in a moment but no lasting benefit'.
It was fairly benign, but the pressure was... unpleasant.
To me, at least.
Yeah, when my guy was top five, I had a moment of YEAH! But when I wasn't... not. I don't find feeling either feelings on a mush is positive. This competitive drive to rank takes away, IMHO, from what is really important. Having a meaningful impact to the people around you.
About applications and MG specifically, I think it could be useful to staff not to see if a player is "good enough for a character but rather to ensure they can roleplay their way out of a paper bag. Some iffy players can be avoided, yet I imagine if Magneto or someone others should be gravitating around is a terrible player then it can have an impact on the MU* as a whole.
This is a hard question. I would be deeply adverse to any kind of audition-- the very idea of an audition places one into a position of judgment and earning, on the spot (and this is important to what bugs me), approval in a moment.
That said, I do get the idea that you want a <important character 'A'> who doesn't suck. I think Mutant Genesis has a good balance here. There's no audition, no situation where you Prove Yourself, but you do gotta express an idea for how this character goes, their arc, and place in the world. But it feels more informal then an audition.
Maybe it ends up with an A who isn't any good in actual play, but what can you do? I don't think auditions prove good A's either. A good A makes RP better for everyone around them. You can't determine that in isolation.
@arkandel If a player is notably bad at handling a certain character, whether a major or minor one, I would hope any staff would take the necessary and likely uncomfortable steps to deal with that, up to and including taking the character away.
Well, like anyone and their hangups, the best part about this hobby is that you don't have to play where you don't want to play.
It can be interpreted however one chooses to interpret it, but I've read over the pitch piece and it doesn't come across as some audition gateway to determine whether or not you're good enough for the game. It comes across to me as a way to prime players into what they hope to achieve with their character and provides a necessary gateway to make sure someone knows that Spider-Man isn't the one with the claws and the mutton chops.
I think it's smart, honestly (to have a check before an FC is apped), to ask the player to leave a little mission statement.
If we'd like to discuss this (whether or not it's an audition and how it makes us feel) more, I'd be happy to do so away from this game's advertisement thread. I'd just hate to derail it further away from other questions about the game.
Delete the Hog Pit. It'll be fun.
I really don't understand He-Man
@ghost A lot of places ask for a little summary of ideas when you app a character, but my first impression of the +pitch system is a positive one. In case anyone missed it before, this is what they're aiming for:
http://mutantgenesismux.com/index.php/Character_Creation#Pitch
I've read it, yeah. I think it's a smart idea.
@ghost Oh, right. To be clear: I've no issues with this game's pitching process. At all. It seems entirely reasonable.
I sort of want to check the game out, I've had a hankering to play a mutant lately. But, while I understand the first come first serve mentality in superhero games, allowing pitches and claims to be made before the game even opened is sort of a turn off. First come first serve makes for a level playing field; allowing pre-open pitches and accepting them (up to and including having a very large "taken" or reserved list) before opening feels less so. That's probably unfair of me since I don't like or want to play a FC but... it nags at me. I may still have a look.
@caryatid What's the difference between:
They're still asking for the exact same thing. They just didn't post an address to do it with a command in-game.
@ixokai I agree, it is a very fine line and I'm not sure I can explain it beyond saying that it feels like there is a difference (to me).
My knee-jerk feelings:
Open game + bring on the pitches = level playing field.
Game not open + not accepting reservations = level playing field.
Game not open + accepting reservations = not a level playing field.
Overall it is not a very important distinction because again, I don't play FCs. I could have PMed the staff here and put in a reservation if I were an FC player, so those who did have no more of an advantage than I did. But. But. There is something about it that niggles at me and gives me an uneasy feeling. It's an approach that doesn't sit easy with me.
@caryatid FWIW, the ability to send in a +pitch prior to logins being allowed was offered to people in this thread. If that's an occasional perk or side benefit of being here, I don't think that's a terrible thing.
@wolfs Yes, I acknowledged it was offered here. I do not agree with the concept of "perks or side benefits" just for being a member of this board, however. I'm a stick in the mud that way.
Disclaimer: I don't think the staff set out to be unfair, or are unfair. Mostly I think it's a side effect of the wave of excitement and anticipation for and of their game. People get excited, you get excited, and you want to extend that wave because it's giddy and fun.
The lack of staff alt transparency bugs me. Refusal to have any is often a sign of issues that have come up plenty of times here.
@enoch You may want want to put the game's address somewhere prominently on the wiki. I had to find it here.
I accept the fact that this stuff is usually just a mad scramble, although some of it being done semi-privately prior to the game clearly being open obviously made it a little easier/harder. I missed out on being able to nab a character by maybe minutes (for a stupid AT&T update, of all things) and... that time window was basically the difference between my being interested in the game and not.
It's no real fault of the staff, this is how it always goes, but it basically means I just sit it out until the next go-round for a chance at one of the chars I actually want to play.
The reaction to the "pre-app process" here seems odd, when meanwhile over in the Gotham game thread literally every interesting female FC in the setting has already been claimed. Like a month+ before the game opens (for the record, that actually kind of bugged me). And that didn't draw a reaction at all.
Are people just more interested in mutants?
@tempest I haven't looked at the Gotham thread. That setting doesn't interest me and I do prefer mutants. But for a good chunk of characters to be claimed a month+ before a game opens, yes, that would bother me too.
@tempest said in Mutant Genesis (X-Men):
The reaction to the "pre-app process" here seems odd, when meanwhile over in the Gotham game thread literally every interesting female FC in the setting has already been claimed. Like a month+ before the game opens (for the record, that actually kind of bugged me). And that didn't draw a reaction at all.
Are people just more interested in mutants?
Don't forget though there are a lot more mutants than there are Gotham feature characters canonically.
@wolfs Yes, I acknowledged it was offered here. I do not agree with the concept of "perks or side benefits" just for being a member of this board, however. I'm a stick in the mud that way.
Disclaimer: I don't think the staff set out to be unfair, or are unfair. Mostly I think it's a side effect of the wave of excitement and anticipation for and of their game. People get excited, you get excited, and you want to extend that wave because it's giddy and fun.
