History? Who Needs it?
Read the article this discussion is about
- Wolvie27
- Dantessa
- Wolvie27
- Dantessa
- Wolvie27
- Dantessa
- roslinds
- Dantessa
This archived discussion is "read only".
» Wolvie27 - History? I'll make _you_ history!
!WARNING! Ah hell, this line I added in at the last moment to save those of you the trouble of reading the full extent of the ramblings of a mud addict, who can't even write a warning short! Hell, this could be a second article, a part 2 even! So, to save those of you the trouble of learning patience, just read the first and the last paragraphs of this juxtaposition of thoughts put into words, much like how most of us would do book reports in highschool a couple of minutes before class, except for obviously, _me_. But if you still read this whole writing after reading this, oh hell (has no fury like an editor and his blue pencil!), you better not say I didn't flamin' warn you!Hehe... Okay, so that subject line was intentionally corny. But lets get to the heart of the matter, history gives a game a past, the players end up shaping the present and so it leads to hope for an enjoyable MUD future, yes? I like to refer to this as the gaming continuum.
Here's how it has worked in my experience. First off as a newbie the world of mud is a chat line, where others through chatting help you learn the commands which help you learn the action/hack'n'slash elements of the game play, all happening in about the first 48 hours of game play, from newbie to novice aka beginner. Then from there you learn to appreciate exploration of the players, npcs, items, skills, spells, rooms, and areas which make up your world, and I can see most folks doing this in anywhere from another 52 hours to 152 hours of game play. Mind you, IRL this usually translates to 1 month to 6 months of having been in a game. This is where I've sat back and then expressed interest in creating stories, either through roleplaying, various types of waring with other players, and doing a little building in the MUD itself. This whole part lasted about 2 years for me IRL. Then the nostalgia sets in, where you chat with other players who have been there way too long as well about the good ol'days of past adventures, which I've found can go on till the last part sets in, loneliness (from the other players reaching this part first and leaving) and boredom, from having BTDT (Been There, Done That) syndrome. All and all, that pretty much sums up my mudding experience, and now I am _ever so slowly_ learning the skills to build my own mud code base from scratch and then my own game.
And the total is about 500 hours of game play, spread out over 3 1/2 years of IRL time. Normally I would see others in the game hit the last stage in about a year and leave. So, the point of this rambling as it relates to game history?
Game history allows for a player to be a part of a present and contribute to a future, thus allowing the player to be in your game, not just passing through, as even I found out I was doing despite having desperately clung to the mud for 3 1/2 years, though it could've easily been 4 years but that isn't that clear since I was bed ridden by illness for 2 years, which thank God I am over with and now on my way to college and university. Oh, and the point I'm getting at is, if a player is anchored to the present by a past and hope for the future, if it is the player's desire, he becomes almost a permanent fixture in the game and there is never any real need to be 'just passing through, sir/madame.'
Now I have to ask myself, who the hell is going to read this whole compilation and actually understand what my rambling gets at? 
One last thing I would like to note is that I have written a good portion of the IC history with assistance of Seandr (the 2nd in command admin/imm) as my editor and publisher for the game I was involved in for about 3 1/2 years and I simply must say it would've been easier for the game had the game started with a "blank slate" history, as suggested in the article, or already had a history before the first player sets foot in the uncharted lands of your mud. Reason being, my experience has shown that writing a history for a mud that has been playing for a couple years just ends up pissing alot of players off, because they feel as if they are being forced into or forgotten by the history being written, even if it supposedly happened before the first players. My solution was just to write a "tie all the shoelaces together" history where I made a patch work story out of all the people, places and things already in existence.
Dang nab it, I really hope folks get what I'm trying to say from all this, mostly that I thought your article was great and for most part dead on the money. Ugh, I write to much sometimes... *mumble*grumble* :P
-- posted by Wolvie27
» Dantessa - Re: History? I'll make _you_ history!
Right Wolvie...it is much easier and MUCH more *efficient* to write a history before developing (and absolutely before opening) a game. If you're willing to give players control, then a blank slate where a history should be could be an interesting route. But it's two extremes, with virtually no feasible middle ground.-- posted by Dantessa
» Wolvie27 - Re: "virtually no feasible middle ground"
In response to message posted by Dantessa:Hmm... This got me thinking, couldn't it be possible to start a game at the beggining of history? Then while the imp/imm influences the game with their plan for how the history will unfold, the players characters would also end up in history, and this I propose would not be a blank slate situation. Do you think this would be a virtual middle ground? Would it even be possible to implement to each group's satisfaction? Hmm, I think it could work if both of the groups agreed to a sort of battle for the bragging writes to having written history itself through their actions.
Also, could you explain in more detail why you think pre-written history and blank slate history are two extremes?
-- posted by Wolvie27
» Dantessa - Re: Re: "virtually no feasible middle ground"
I think if you begin at the beginning of history you have to be prepared to let the players make history, period. Sure you can "guide" it, but it's *them* playing the game, so they will ultimately decide what happens. You can run a plot, but if no one participates, or everyone decides to interpret something differently than you want them to, can you just ignore what the players are doing and go ahead with your plan anyway? Not likely.If you start with a predefined history it is set in stone. You have decided, you have based the game around it, etc. It's done with and you move on from there.
So they are two extremes because one is the basis for the present, and the other is a void as to how you arrived at the present.
-- posted by Dantessa
» Wolvie27 - Re: "a predefined history . . . set in stone"
In response to message posted by Dantessa:Hmm... Is a predefined history alot like a pre-game plan? If so, if "You can run a plot, but if no one participates, or everyone decides to interpret something differently than you want them to, can you just ignore what the players are doing and go ahead with your plan anyway?" wouldn't even a predefined history be subject to the players as well? From this the conclusion I see would be that once an administrator hands a game over to the players, the players write the history from there on anyways.
I suppose that's why MUDs are the best in interactive story telling because everyone has their story to tell.
But I'd better not get away from what I see as being the drive behind this article, writing a history for your MUD, even a short "In the beginning..." story for a MUD set at the dawn of time, will boost the overall experience and quality of play for your game, possibly even giving it direction, momentum, and purpose (if that's even possible in a MUD). So, write a damn history already!
If I haven't already said it, thanks for the article Dantessa, and I can't wait to read more!
-- posted by Wolvie27
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.