Optional Realities & Project Redshift
-
All of this seems aimed at keeping the list of games on the site more limited than something like MUDConnector. Which is all well and good, I just think it's clearly more arbitrary and subjective than might have been intended, as it was seemingly written by players with more experience with RPI MUDs than anything else, and that's going to cause headaches for y'all going forward.
-
It hasn't been an issue thus far, but if it would help the MUSH community feel more comfortable in seeking being listed than I'll have something by next week. Right now game contacts us, we have a conversation, and we work it out via e-mails. It's been a pretty pleasant experience so far but I guess we're losing potential candidates with poor definition.
-
Also yes one of the reasons for the criteria is specifically so we don't list every game ever and become TMC or TMS or any of the other general listing sites. We aren't trying to be that. As for headaches well... I really want to have the community be an open discussion about design and roleplay for text-based games and have it be a place where games an advertise (regardless of being listed or not). The only place where the criteria has been a problem is here. Thankfully any headache I have received here has been balanced by learning more about a part of the text-based community I wasn't familiar with.
Pointing being that "headache" is relative. You can't please everybody and you can't always be right. You just have to do what you think is best and not be an asshole to other people and maybe you'll come out ahead.
-
@Jeshin
It's way less about comfort (dude, it's your website, it certainly doesn't offend my sensibilities) than it is about my suspicion that this is going to lead to a lot of long, repetitive conversations with every MUSH or MOO or MUD who might ask to be listed. I'm not worrying about MUSHes being wronged, I'm just betting this is going to get extremely silly and isn't as good a measure as you might've originally thought.But it will get silly for you, not me, so that's OK.
-
the coded system thing makes me think anyplace using Faraday's system would count for that. Combat is truly automated, you type in the command to attack and the game handles the result and spits out where you were hit and the severity of the resulting wound. Though I am not sure death is possible through the automation I know it has happened at places using it.
-
My only question in terms of the 'listing' was sort of the 'what was the point'? If it was for advertising space, I think a lot of players know where to go to find games that are 'up their alley' and if Jeshin and Co feel like a new site needs to exist to advertise a particular kind of game with a very specific particular kind of criteria...then hey. Up to them I guess. The list to me mostly looked like "RPI and a Couple Other Things' and I have as I said long lost interest in the RPI vs debate so I sort of dropped out of that discussion.
A site that pulled in from some different groups: a few of the long-successful, possibly even commercial MUDS, some of the long in the community MUSH staffers/players, etc, could get some conversations going that were interesting TO ME about game design and how to retain players, that -might- have aspects that go across genre, that work whether you are a half hack/slash half rp game with pay-for-perks, and a WoD game, and an 'other MUSH' but maybe everyone's ideas would be different, and I don't think a space exists right NOW that would pull those people together for an actually productive conversation, and I am not making that space. Nor would it really be a 'listing'. Plus maybe it already exists or once existed or who knows. Honestly I forgot my point but I am still going to hit 'submit' because the button is so blue and tempting...
-
@Jeshin Perhaps it hasn't been an issue, but Perhaps you never came to a community purporting to be an independent Mu listing that wanted to list any game that met certain criteria. Then when that community expressed that your criteria were vague at best, you responded by saying that the criteria are vague on purpose because you do not in fact want to be an independent Mu listing that lists any game that meets certain criteria.
Perhaps you should just be honest about what you are. Perhaps you should just say: We talk about Mu things and perhaps, if you ask, we'll list your game as an example of what we consider a good game.
-
Mmm, no we've posted on quite a few other text-based forums and communities. Like I said I'll have them all nice and defined for you by next week. As to honesty. You can't be more honest than I've been in this thread. I'd laid things out consistently, answered questions, admitted when I was wrong, and even updated an OR article and made an announcement on the community forum with clarifications.
Now I'll define things better. Maximum honesty unlocked.
-
@Alzie said:
@Jeshin Then perhaps you need to actually define automated systems beyond 'Whatever I want it to mean at any given point in time.'
Alize blunts what I was saying. OR is a personal curated list and little else. It has an application process that I believe to be ridiculous and not at all representative of quality RP.
IMO, OR fails at its openly stated goal of quality RP because of its criteria.
Because of the same criteria and the way it's been defended, I don't see a welcome mat to coming over there and saying these things. I would be tilting at windmills. At least here I have the chance of an audience willing to discuss the merits of Some Other Site.
-
I happen to agree. I've (we've) argued why we don't agree, and you (@Jeshin) still insist on arguing the point. So, I've pretty much stopped contributing to the argument. But it seems to be becoming circular.
@Alzie said it best. Points to Alzie. And Theno.
A thread where everything's made up and the points don't matter.
-
I wanted to add, just because it was brought up before, that KD isn't 'trying to get on the list'. We know @Jeshin, he plays with us sometimes, and I've had some lovely conversations with him that aren't reflected by the initial tone on this thread. But because it became a 'this is the club, some people are trying to get in, like KD hey!' I wanted to clarify a bit. When he approached us at first we said 'We don't have any automated systems that look like the ones you are talking about. We have a lot of 'code we might want to make simpler' (as in it happens without staff having to check)' that could maybe qualify later, so if we end up doing it we will tell you! I don't even remember off the top of my head what those things were, they are not high on the list. I don't anticipate it happening soon.
I'm not sure why I felt like jumping in and explaining, except that I am on here and all pumped up on coffee. As we can see by all posts I've made today that end in "I don't know why I made this post." Fear not, I'm not on any other forums today, tainting people with my pointless paragraphs. Just you guys.
-
I think you'll find that 'automated systems' is a very simplistic and minor requirement. While the degree of automation required can be construed as vague, having automation at all is pretty simple. Is it anything-goes, may as well be roleplaying in a Yahoo chatroom for all intents and purposes? Probably not sufficiently automated. Do you have automated systems that generate outcomes rather than leaving it up to the player or some sort of arbitration? You probably qualify. Nobody's really being 'excluded' here. If you think your game qualifies and apply to be listed, and are willing to contribute with articles or discussion topics or what-have-you, then apply. The idea that not listing games that haven't even asked to be listed, or speculation whether they would or wouldn't be accepted when they haven't even inquired as to listing, is kind of silly.
There's a lot of hostility, chest-beating, and elitism going around, and it really turns me off from wanting to try to engage with anybody here, because people only seem to be interested in debating with straw men.
@Thenomain said:
I would be tilting at windmills.
Whether you choose to tilt at windmills in a place in which you feel comfortable and secure, or elsewhere, you're still tilting at windmills.
@Thenomain said:
It has an application process that I believe to be ridiculous and not at all representative of quality RP.
We're not looking to define quality roleplay so much as collect a group of similar games that happen to have quality RP. In addition to the other qualifications. Whether or not permanent death or automated systems play a role in determining the 'quality' of RP is inherently going to be somewhat subjective and debateable. It might encourage a stronger mean, if one really wanted to argue that, but it really just comes down to storytelling and writing. Please stop burning straw men, they can't fight back, you know.
In any event, we do have some updates:
Arucard shares his thoughts on manipulating player motivations to achieve desired effects!
http://optionalrealities.com/how-to-be-puppet-masters-for-your-game/The results from last month's short story contest!
http://optionalrealities.com/forums/index.php?topic=191.0Optional Realities' community mafia game, round one!
http://optionalrealities.com/forums/index.php?topic=214.0Discussion of the merits of permanent death!
http://optionalrealities.com/forums/index.php?topic=213.0That last one might be of especial interest here, since it seemed to be a point of contention and debate in this thread.
-
@crayon said:
I think you'll find that 'automated systems' is a very simplistic and minor requirement. While the degree of automation required can be construed as vague, having automation at all is pretty simple.
Golly gee guys, why are you so stupid? This is a simple concept.
@crayon Said:
Is it anything-goes, may as well be roleplaying in a Yahoo chatroom for all intents and purposes? Probably not sufficiently automated. Do you have automated systems that generate outcomes rather than leaving it up to the player or some sort of arbitration? You probably qualify.
So again, the definition appears to be any command that a player types which then produces an output. So either we're not as stupid as you want us to be or you're not as smart as you think you are.
On another note, it always warms the nether regions when someone gets their panties in a twist because you're asking them to define something in their pretend fun time project and they resort to insults and intelligence comparisons because they have no legitimate answer.
@crayon Said:
There's a lot of hostility, chest-beating, and elitism going around, and it really turns me off from wanting to try to engage with anybody here, because people only seem to be interested in debating with straw men.
-
Yeah. You don't actually -have- to engage with anybody here. You don't have to be here at all.
If there's an -applications process- I'm not sure what the conversation is even about? Have people from here applied? Again @Jeshin cited Kushiel's Debut, but he approached our staff with an -invitation- and we said we didn't think we met the criteria after discussing it. He and I have also had long discussions about truly valuable cross MUD/MUSH general 'text game design' issues that could be worthwhile that would have to happen with games that don't 'meet the criteria'. Those discussions aren't going to happen on your site though.
What do you want from advertising your articles here? The people who read this site know yours exists. They'll check it out if they want. The reason that this thread has so many clicks thus far is because the argument gets people heated enough that they want to read or contribute or in some cases maybe some ground was made. It's not to see the article links. Promise.
-
Hug it out, guys. Hug it out.
-
I'd hug Brody, he always had good discussions going on other MU* sites, but he's just an article guy there. He should come here, except I don't really know that there'd be lots of crossover convo with the 'mostly WoD but some other things' and 'Spaceworld I designed myself' (I never played it because I am just not a Sci-Fi gal, but it seems impressive conceptually)
-
I think that Crayon (and some of the other OR staff) just question my insistence in dedicating time to musoapbox. Compared to every other community we have approached for advertising this one is by far the most "hostile" or at least the most suspicious. As for engagement, as community lead he is supposed to engage with you guys. I'm just kind of hanging around because despite not agreeing with everything posted here it's not like anyone here has compared me to Hitler yet.
As to Kushiel's Debut what Gingerlily said was true. I played with them a couple of times. I personally find their game very intriguing and I all but said if there was a crafting systems, automated combat, or some other singular automated system that I'd love to have them listed. At the time he pointed out they were working on things which may be considered automated systems to which I verified my interest in contacting them again when it was done. Hopefully I made it clear in this thread that I approached them and my intent in referencing them was showing that the barrier of entry to your standard MUSH was likely very low compared to what some people might imagine.
As to hostility, chest-beating, and elitism. I (for some reason) was accused of being snobbish or looking down on the community early in this thread and I clearly cited references both within the thread and on the OR community that I was not only linking this community on the boards as one to check out but also bringing up MUSHes in our other games section. Text conveys tone very poorly but hopefully the -actions- taken are clear. I've engaged in discussion, we've disagreed, I've never once insulted people on this board about it, I've clearly admitted when you guys had a point I agreed with, and I try and keep this thread only active once a week unless a discussion is occurring that justifies repeated posts because I know we are not the most popular people here.
-
As to Brody he's more than just an article guy on OR but he just released Knee Deep and is in the middle of making an overhaul to Otherspace so he doesn't really have time to dive into discussions all over the forum. He is working with us this month on something special though, bless him.
-
@Alzie said:
So again, the definition appears to be any command that a player types which then produces an output. So either we're not as stupid as you want us to be or you're not as smart as you think you are.
No. Having code at all does not inherently satisfy the automated systems requirement. Writing a script that allows you to type 'joe' as input and get 'bob' back as output isn't an automated system in the context of roleplaying game design. It's not even really a system.
Let's say you wanted to make Risk into a game. Rather than writing all of the rules into the game as mechanics, you write it so that the game effectively just simulates the Risk board. You can move pieces in ways that defy the actual rules of the game, if you really wanted to, but everybody's there to play Risk so nobody really does that, and if they do they get slapped around for it. You can roll dice and such with the system, but you have to sort out how many dice you should roll and when. This is not an automatic system.
If you code in the mechanics of the game as an automated system, usually a binding one, the game determines how many dice you should roll, and sometimes when.
It's the difference between a monopoly game where you roll the dice and then manually select where your piece moves and people look at you funny if you do it wrong, and a game that does it for you.
Most nonconsent MUShes, and several MUSHes in general, probably qualify. While their automated systems are more Risk and less, say, Crusader Kings 2 or Civilization V, usually, they're still automated systems.
I'm really not sure where all the talk of snobbishness, nepotism, elitism and the like came from, but for all of the complaining about our requirements, I don't believe anybody's actually applied and been rejected.
Generally speaking, the tone of debate here has seemed on the combative side, and I'm not really one to flinch away from debate or being combative in it, so if that's off-putting, I'm sorry, but when somebody repeatedly torches the same strawmen or spears the same windmill forty consecutive times and then starts calling people stupid, I'm perfectly capable of pointing out the fallacy.
The automated systems requirement has less to do with 'roleplaying' and more to do with 'game', specifically different classes of and approaches to design.
-
@crayon said:
Let's say you wanted to make Risk into a game. Rather than writing all of the rules into the game as mechanics, you write it so that the game effectively just simulates the Risk board. You can move pieces in ways that defy the actual rules of the game, if you really wanted to, but everybody's there to play Risk so nobody really does that, and if they do they get slapped around for it. You can roll dice and such with the system, but you have to sort out how many dice you should roll and when. This is not an automatic system.
The way I'd put it is the difference between Magic Online and a lot of free multiplayer Magic: the Gathering game clients.
Basically Magic Online is the portion of the game Wizards of the Coast makes (or, well, has a developer make for them) to play uh, online; it contains the actual rules, so you can't play more lands than you're allowed per turn, cards can only be untapped in the right circumstances, etc. The code enforces these things, you can't do anything against the game mechanics.
The free clients only facilitate the game itself. You can draw cards, tap them, send them to the graveyard... basically do whatever you want with them - it enforces nothing, it just lets you do things without knowing or caring what's actually on those cards.
For obvious reasons the first is also way buggier than the latter, but I digress.
