Posts made by Thenomain

@faraday said in Innovations to the form (Crowdsourcing?):

@Thenomain said in Innovations to the form (Crowdsourcing?):

What the hell does "web-based game" mean?

Doesn't the "... instead of relying on telnet" part give you a pretty good idea though? I mean, what would you call it? Web-centric? Web-only?

Web-centric and web-only are two entirely different concepts, tho. Slack, for instance, relies on some dated technologies and puts them together for pure amazement. I would hate to return to play-by-post.

"A game that provides a MUSH-like playing experience(*) but with only an integrated web client/wiki and no telnet connection to support existing MU* client software."

So someone will create another client for real-time communications with the server, one that might not be web-based. I actually think "web based" right now to be still pretty limiting; look at the number of people who use Skype as their game-enhancing system of choice.

So either I think "web-based" is a terrible way to view innovation in the hobby, or I think people are mis-using the term.

So, you know, we've been going through this spate lately on these forums where people are "but that's a sucky idea and you should be ashamed of having it" kind of responses for people looking for input.

I'm just going to leave this here, because it's awesome:

@faraday said in Innovations to the form (Crowdsourcing?):

@Arkandel said in Innovations to the form (Crowdsourcing?):

Look, I know it's not in the works. And I don't want to derail the thread.

But a web-based game instead of relying on telnet has got to be the largest innovation to the form we can have here.

You mean like this? Just a prototype, btw.

I missed the comment the first time around, so I'm commenting now:

What the hell does "web-based game" mean?

Faraday has an idea, because she's in the coding industry and can think further than the buzzwords. I've seen "web-based" mean everything from "just have a telnet window in a web site" to ... I can't find it now, but there's a scene-based subscription RP setup that was kickstarted fairly successfully, had some RPG authors involved, and would not fit what we normally expect in this hobby.

Right now, "web-based" is as meaningless as "online game". Even comparing a MUD to a MUSH as "telnet-based" has only to do with the service, not any notable information the game itself.

Rant ended.

Faraday: That looks super-cool, an updated play-by-post service. One of my first dial-ups was a board called "The RPG BBS". We took our role-play totes serious.

@Tempest said in Sin City Chronicles:

@surreality When the people involved are going to put in 0 work beyond copy/pasting code from another game, why would they?

Just so you know, I'm offended by this statement. It's not a spazz-worthy offense, but I feel that you're taking the code I've worked over five years building up and boiling it down to a "copy/paste" scenario.

(note: A lot of us wish my code was a copy/paste scenario!)

You could have said this constructively. You could have said, "Yeah, but after open, what do you have planned?" It's a challenge, sure, but it gets to the core of your issues more than unsubstantiated insults.

If you don't think I'm continuing to tweak and add to my code, to take requests and consider them, then maybe you need to take a step back and think about who you're summarizing. I'm already regretting some of the XP/Beat system code changes I'm going to have to do for this game, but I'm willing to because Reasons, mostly because I'm proud of my code. You don't have to be, that's fine, but it'd be more helpful to reel back the shotgun approach of complaining; you're less likely to hit a bystander.

Googled "Haunted Memories Mush", tripped over this:

https://github.com/HM-CODE/Haunted-Memories

This is the official repository of the game.

G'luck.

@Gingerlily

I think you and I (and possibly also @Three-Eyed-Crow and probably also @Ghost) are trying to bend the consensus that "non-constructive" doesn't always mean "using insulting words".

On Wora (since we're now merging this thread and the MSB Meta-Discussion thread), the exact rule was, "Attack the idea, not the person." This is what @Arkandel was reminding people of. I'll be honest I didn't think that @bored's original argument was attacking the person, tho I think that he and @surreality did slip into that without using the same four-letter words that Ghost did.

Here, the exact phrasing is, "Something besides the equivalent of 'NO YOU'. That shouldn't be hard, right?" But this isn't a rule. We were pretty hard-assed about the rule on Wora, while here we are, coming close to discussing what "constructive" really means. I think we can both agree that "no you" happened before Ghost raised the middle finger.

But then, we're both +1ing each other so much that people might think we'd need some alone-time. I'm not just preaching to the choir here, though, I promise.

@Gingerlily said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

And I'd comment that its derailing from the original topic which isn't very cool of me but it was pretty derailed anyway.

I was going to poke light fun at @Ghost for participating in the angry derailing this thread after the diatribe in the "MSB Meta Thread" about how derailing threads (mostly advertisement threads) was evil. I was going to ask, "So now do you understand why people might go into an advertisement thread and remind others what this person did elsewhere on the boards?"

Then I wasn't, because I didn't want to derail the thread any further and I didn't want to be actually mean to Ghost.

Then I did, because I still like how context changes people's views pretty drastically, I found a way to frame the sentiment as a way that isn't mean, and it's not like I can derail the thread any more.

@Arkandel said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

MSB doesn't have the exclusive on these things, you know? Sometimes it doesn't go well and folks walk away pissed off. Other times a disagreement can be civil - I don't think @Ghost is hoping I get food poisoning, for example.

Being technically correct is not the same as being right, and yeah while I agree that @Ghost danced over a line, I don't think that his (or hers; I honestly don't know) response was out of line for what the thread had become.

I don't think you need to defend your views on this, but the more you do the more it looks to me like you're nit-picking, that you're missing the forest for the trees.

@bored

Dude.

Really?

Look in the mirror.

See that person?

That person is likable.

You're making that person really hard to like right now.

Do right by that person.

@Ganymede said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

@Thenomain said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

@Ganymede said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

Sorry, @Thenomain.

Yes, because I know who you're going to ask for code...

I meant, I'm bumping our Mass Effect project.

I know, but I would have ended up coding it, for the same reason that you would have finished it.

@Ganymede said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

@surreality said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):

...and I'm sorry, @cirim13. It is not my intent to let anybody down in this. It's something I'd wanted to do for a long time, but I am just... done.

Tell you what.

Gimme what you got. I'll work with @Lisse24, and do what I can to lift the project off the ground. Least I could do.

Sorry, @Thenomain.

Yes, because I know who you're going to ask for code...

@Cupcake said in RL things I love:

Unicorn Frappucinos are here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbYWhdLO43Q

@Arkandel said in Fear and Loathing:

Are you guys planning to use 2.0 books as they become available or are you only using the 1.0 versions anyway? I'm referring to things like updated Bloodlines, Kiths, etc.

How dare you raise my hopes that these will be released by the end of 2017.

<end tangent>

The original goal of the Wora Wiki was to have a place to permanently file game information. It was about 40/60 useful vs. trash; having a place where every game any one of us ever played on was surprisingly helpful when people were snapping their fingers saying, "That ... one game with the ... thing that happened?" Well 'the thing that happened' may be on the wiki, or some other mnemonic reminder, and blamo!

The 'user' page was sacrosanct. Nobody was allowed to edit what someone had to say about themselves. The rest of the wiki, tho, was fair game, so there was one entry where I listed a bunch of thoughts I had ("Rules of Staffing" was an ongoing pet project), and another entry in the main wiki by @RDC where he leveraged my disgust of anything scatological to post a picture of a giant turd, which he did after I said something he didn't like or something like that. (I honestly can't remember and am over it.)

It would be pretty trivial to have and enforce a few basic rules, in spite of @Ghost's ongoing negativity understanding of human nature. Unfettered, it would be a scat-show. Gently moderated, it could be a lot of fun.

It's not like Wikipedia isn't a haven for drama llamas at its highest level. (It is.) People will try to abuse the rules. (They will.) I personally think that a common-sense approach somewhere between Wikipedia's rules ("don't make us care") and Stack Overflow ("ze must follow ze rules achtung!!!") with a hobbyist flavoring ("this is for fun, folks"), and I believe that it's entirely possible.

@Three-Eyed-Crow said in Random links:

Yep.

Not that I'm hating on the statue and I like the discussion it's provoked, but I wish it was more apparent it was there due to a finance company/index. I'm deeply creeped out by how much advertising we absorb without full consciousness we're absorbing it, and this is A Thing Like That.

I'm more interested that the meaning of things changes so drastically with a small change in context. Even if it was another completely self funded act of guerrilla art, the creator of the original piece of art would still be justified to be angry at subversion of his purpose.

That Fearless Girl is social movement in form of advertising is, I think, the irony that undermines both.

The article also uses a wonderful turn of phrase, "guerrilla capitalist art". Makes my brain wonderfully spin.

I didn't know that the Fearless Girl was an advertisement.

https://gregfallis.com/2017/04/14/seriously-the-guy-has-a-point/

@Ghost said in MSB: The meta-discussion:

@Thenomain said in MSB: The meta-discussion:

Incidentally, "still around" is a shitty metric of success.

The Cleveland Browns

Exception that proves the rule.

I love Browns fans. If there was a conceptual opposite of "fair weather fans", these people are it. When you can go to your stadium on game-day when you don't even have a team, you should win a fucking prize for a mix of both sad and awesome.

That is, their team might not be a success, but damn their support base is.

@WTFE said in MSB: The meta-discussion:

@Ganymede I have no experience with it. We're talking the past tense though; any particular reason?

I would like to remind you at this point that WORA is past tense. It was taken down by a server crash and a lack of being assed.

So in the sense of "still around", WORA is also a failure.

Incidentally, "still around" is a shitty metric of success.

@Lithium

Mostly the chargen. I feel like I need a degree in Advanced Spreadsheets, or be a rehabilitated Eve Online player.

To me, "gritty" is more about realism in fantasy; hunger, disease, people trying to live and survive. I've played a fairly gritty D&D campaign before, so it doesn't need to be reflected in the system. What will the GM focus on?

Since we rely on the system to fill that role on Mu*s, I'd like to add Burning Wheel to what I consider as gritty. I don't think Dungeon World is gritty, though Apocalypse World is. AW doesn't have any "survival" rules, though if you read the book you know that if you're not playing up the post-apocalypse then you are playing wrong.

This can be handled by wikis and news files, for the bolder games that are willing to make a statement like "you are playing this wrong".

@magee101: "Friday Night Firefight" has been the name of the combat system since the original Cyberpunk (2013, of all things; how we saw the future as depressing and how unexpectedly depressing it came down to be).