Thinking about quitting.....

[JsWill]

I've recently left the Cantr world again and I'd like to document a few reasons. First is that my personal life was far too busy to further develop my character effectively unfortunately. However, I don't think that's something I couldn't have worked through if not for these next reasons.

Cantr has became very static. By that I mean nothing happens and specifically nothing happens in game. Now that part isn't necessarily the fault of the players, rather, what I've noticed is it's the fault of the game mechanics. Without the ability to have sudden deaths (aside from OOC purposes) the game seems rather dull on the emotional side for me. No emotion can be felt (at least by me) when someone dies for OOC reason because I as a player knows it a conscious decision made by another player and not for the punch of losing said character. So I feel like if there was more ways for characters to die then it would be more of a punch when they really do die.

The next is innovation, now this ties into my first complaint about the game and this does involve the player base. As we all know the devs themselves wont add things without the publics consent, which, is a good thing or can be. But when you have a player base like Cantr has that cringe at change just because they think it *might* be bad then that's when you start having issues. In this case, it's an issue. It's causing the game to lose in some very basic areas where it could actually capitalize on and I firmly believe that those who think they wont like the implementations will find out they actually do if they just give it a chance. In other words, add more challenge and players will flock to the game while current players find the game isn't as stale as it was when they were previously playing.

These are just the simple suggestions I have for improving the game. There are many more but as it stands until people are willing to try these out then they certainly wont have an open mind to the others. I feel like people are scared that their favorite game will become something no one will like. Okay, fair enough concern, what I don't think they realize is that we always have to opportunity to revert. But until we're willing to take risks then the game will stay static.

Now, what concerns me is this. So far the game has been relatively stable with the small player base it has. However, what happens when players start falling off the map? By that I mean start leaving... I've seen more than handful of players suggest an urge to leave the game, one of these being someone I played with personally and quite liked our players interactions. But in my opinion with all due respect to the rest of the community, those players are the only thing keeping this game afloat right now. You know the type of players that are willing to think outside the box and be the 'bad guys' willing to kill other players, cause drama, untimely deaths and stir up some unwanted excitement by some that soon realize that's exactly what they were waiting for.

I've expressed this concern before but I don't think I articulated myself well enough. At least people didn't seem to understand because I focused on the flaws of the game and people saw it as an attack. But reality is that players will leave (even ones with characters that we love or love to hate.) and with the the excitement of the game will slowly drain. My solution for this has been and always will be the only solution that is plausible, attract more players. We do that by making this game more intriguing, adding more depth and excitement and ultimately taking risks where risks are necessary.

I'm concerned that when people see I left the game they will write off my criticism as just a biased attack of some sort or at least think that my criticism isn't note-worthy cause I'm no longer playing. But that's not the case.

Regardless of what everyone may perhaps think I do love this game. I do love all of the community, even those who may not particularly care for me. I only wish to save this game and its largest flaw right now is the lack of players. Being a primarily player oriented game, without players it's a text simulator.

So please, when you read my post don't take offense. Don't think I'm attacking the game or you or your characters or even those working on the game. Instead view it as constructive and seriously think about what I've said. Then unleash all your agreements *or* criticism upon me. But please, lets start a discussion on this topic and please keep an open mind. Lets work together to draw more like minded people to the game cause like many I want to see this game grow in numbers. Not the same empty islands or the same empty characters. I want tragedy, drama, love, peace and ultimately on the game aspect a challenge to some extent.

Cantr is a roleplaying game mixed with a society simulation game and does both equally as bad and I'll show you a few examples of this.

Roleplay aspect that is bad. - If we're selling this to people as a roleplaying game (And I know it's free it's a figure of speech.) why are there extremely long roads at the very beginning of the game that can take a week in real life time to walk down with little to no interaction with other people while doing so? Why not role play a long trip instead of actually having a long tedious wait to get to the end of an endless road? Vehicles? Cause we can certainly think of a solution for that so they aren't useless and it wouldn't be difficult, but it's fear of change from what I can tell.

Society simulation aspect that is bad. - Not enough death. Death is frequent in society and whether it be from old age, illness or just accidents it's not frequent enough. Theft is also frequent but in Cantr it's almost impossible for players to commit and if they do commit it they have little means of escape due to the features at hand. The roads for example.

And this can go in both Society simulation and Roleplay cause honestly I think it fits both. Recently I made a suggestion about weather effecting you. I think it was a good suggestion at least the last time I checked a lot seemed to agree, a majority if I remember correctly. It isn't forcing role play as someone said before, it's stimulating it.

Stimulating roleplay is when you put things in place that encourage people to follow a certain degree of logic during a certain period of time or face consequences aligned with that.

Forcing role play is doing the same thing but telling them they aren't allowed to suffer those consequences. In other words, putting the consequences there but making it against the rules to ever have to suffer said consequence. No one holding a gun to your head in other words.

Stimulating role play in a role play is fine. Not in a society simulation of course but I feel like people want both without taking the necessary steps to obtain both.

Anyway, those are some of the reasons I quit. Not all, the more complex reasons aren't worth mentioning if I know that no one will be willing to find solutions for the problems I've already mentioned. As it stands, Cantr is a cool free game I can come back to from time to time and enjoy until I ultimately get bored of the current state of things and leave. But I just wish Cantr was enthralling enough that I didn't have to keep leaving out of sheer boredom and the feeling like it's a task just to log in day in and day out. A game shouldn't a chore, even a role playing game.

It should be enthralling, exciting, lively and it should be a bit faster when it comes to certain things that impede role play such as walking down a road or even sailing a ship or even driving down a road even though driving is already decently fast. But cutting down on the time it takes to get from point A to point B wouldn't be a bad thing at all.

[returner]

Great post. You were a bit heavy on the absolving yourself of non-constructive criticism, but maybe that's what is needed to get through to the conservatives (because let's face it, Cantr's success or failure is a battle between the conservative status-quo and those like myself and yourself who want to break the status-quo).

Just take a look at the player base statistics. If we continue to be conservative and maintain the status-quo, why would you think anything would change? There's been a consistent steady decline because of the status-quo.

I don't think I need to be more verbose than this. That's it - we can continue to be conservative until we grind to zero players, or try new and innovative things on all fronts - features (gameplay changes etc), marketing (advertising, the presentation of the website).

Either way, I'm happy to play until this ship sinks, but it would be unfortunate of course. [Plugging the donation drive, because without change, nothing will change: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26908

[Friar Briar]

Butter.

[JsWill]

Great post. You were a bit heavy on the absolving yourself of non-constructive criticism, but maybe that's what is needed to get through to the conservatives (because let's face it, Cantr's success or failure is a battle between the conservative status-quo and those like myself and yourself who want to break the status-quo).

Just take a look at the player base statistics. If we continue to be conservative and maintain the status-quo, why would you think anything would change? There's been a consistent steady decline because of the status-quo.

I don't think I need to be more verbose than this. That's it - we can continue to be conservative until we grind to zero players, or try new and innovative things on all fronts - features (gameplay changes etc), marketing (advertising, the presentation of the website).

Either way, I'm happy to play until this ship sinks, but it would be unfortunate of course. [Plugging the donation drive, because without change, nothing will change: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26908

Honestly, as it stands I'm not willing to donate. I know that sounds bad but Cantr just isn't complete enough for me to want to give money to it, not right now anyway. But with appropriate changes I would gladly dish out 50 dollars a month for it, more if it was changed enough to keep me interested. But my donation wouldn't matter right now anyway cause lets assume one person donated enough to keep the site up, what good would it do? Once the player count drops below a certain amount the game is doomed anyway.

There is a point of no return and I have no idea if we've reached it yet, all I know is once we do then the attempts to stop this game from going down will be null and void. I've even actively tried to recruit new players but they never stay cause after I tell them about it being a role play game and the long waiting period to get from point A to point B they lose interest. Keep in mind these aren't people new to role play, they are veteran RPers that would be very valuable members to the community, dedicated and active.

But you're right, it's the design that's killing the game, not lack of donations cause donations would come with more players. But what I will do is plug it myself as many places as I can find if you think it would help. I'm just not willing to donate myself, not with what is currently here.

It may very well take a Cantr III before we can get this train rolling again though.

[Friar Briar]

It may very well take a Cantr III before we can get this train rolling again though.

I share this opinion too and came to it several months ago.

Someone, I think it was Returner, said that there is no product ownership of this game, and for good or ill, that is one of the biggest reasons why I think there is a serious decline now. I mean, I'm loving the egalitarian ideals in the game and on the forums, but without someone seriously putting their foot down on game change decisions, all things Cantr will remain slow and resistant to change.

[JsWill]

I share this opinion too and came to it several months ago.

Someone, I think it was Returner, said that there is no product ownership of this game, and for good or ill, that is one of the biggest reasons why I think there is a serious decline now. I mean, I'm loving the egalitarian ideals in the game and on the forums, but without someone seriously putting their foot down on game change decisions, all things Cantr will remain slow and resistant to change.

You just summed up what I've wanted to say for a very long time. The game needs a direction, not a thousand and one directions.

[returner]

It may very well take a Cantr III before we can get this train rolling again though.

I share this opinion too and came to it several months ago.

Someone, I think it was Returner, said that there is no product ownership of this game, and for good or ill, that is one of the biggest reasons why I think there is a serious decline now. I mean, I'm loving the egalitarian ideals in the game and on the forums, but without someone seriously putting their foot down on game change decisions, all things Cantr will remain slow and resistant to change.

The GAB are supposed to be responsible for this but naturally they are conservatives. This isn't a criticism, it's only natural and normal that they are like this. But natural and normal is not necessarily innovative, and if the natural & normal way of doing things was increasing the playerbase - then GREAT! But it's not, so obviously the path is wrong. And one might say "how can you say the path is wrong? This is what we like! That's an opinion and nothing more" - then let's talk again in 5 years time when the Cantr playerbase is nearly zero... (which - if you look at Cantr statistics - is the trend we can safely assume is correct).

JsWill's quitting post is a spark. It's the potential beginning of an overhaul, an innovation. But just like a spark on a gas stove top, you need gas to make it last. In all likelihood, it'll remain a spark and nothing will come out of it, unfortunately. I wish I did, but I don't have the authority to move it forward at all.

[Joshuamonkey]

There's been a lot more serious game changes in these 2 or 3 years than there were before because of Greek's work, and it's still going. And there have also been lots of new items. But I don't think just implementing new features will solve the problem.
I also highly doubt making a new Cantr would be any more successful, if you're still depending on volunteers.
I haven't had much time to work on programming Cantr, but I hope to during the summer. But I ask, sincerely, what could we do that would really make a difference in the player base? I'm sure there are many things, but what are they specifically? Making Cantr more SEO friendly?

[Friar Briar]

But I ask, sincerely, what could we do that would really make a difference in the player base?

Bring out all your murderers and thieves.

And there have also been lots of new items. But I don't think just implementing new features will solve the problem.

No, and I don't think so either. But it boils down to exactly what JsWill said: The game needs a direction.

[Rebma]

But I ask, sincerely, what could we do that would really make a difference in the player base?

Butter.

I think the biggest help would be to just let RD and ProgD get down with their bad selves, and forget about all the staff politics that get dragged into it.

[Friar Briar]

Butter.

I think the biggest help would be to just let RD and ProgD get down with their bad selves, and forget about all the staff politics that get dragged into it.

Rebma, all my money goes to you.

I'll join RD just to implement butter.

[Rugila]

After my last character dies I am going to quit Cantr. Frankly, i don't care if Cantr goes Bankcrupt anymore. I am honestly tired at putting up with PD. Soon, I'll be free from Cantr!

[returner]

I haven't had much time to work on programming Cantr, but I hope to during the summer. But I ask, sincerely, what could we do that would really make a difference in the player base? I'm sure there are many things, but what are they specifically? Making Cantr more SEO friendly?

It's more than that. A lot more if there's no funding. You need more than just hand-picked "volunteer staff". You need to engage the playerbase and rally them behind an idea, sell them on the idea and you'll have a far more powerful team than any staff - paid or not - could provide. What you're seeing in this thread is a prime example of a disenfranchised playerbase - the complete opposite of the ideal.

Working on the SEO is definitely one avenue. Considering other revenue streams - such as well placed ads, maybe on the forum - would provide a larger cash pool to make investments in the right places. Whether that's simply adverts or getting featured in relevant RP magazines or getting into the news as this amazing 10 - 15 year old Society Simulator.

Cantr is run a little opaque, a little transparently. We should clean up as much of the opaqueness as possible. One such example - which could also allow the game features to be developed much more quickly - is to open source it. Suddenly there's no need for a massive approval process for people who want to contribute - they simply provide a git patch and those who are actually part of the official staff can apply the patch. Additionally, open sourcing it makes it far more secure because you have potentially hundreds of eyes on it - some probably a lot more skilled than the current volunteer staff - checking it out.

Actually reaching out to human beings in the right places is important, too. Talking to the editor of some online news website, for example. Or getting mentioned on a proper "Top 100 RPGs" sort of website - not one that is driven by incentivised votes (most of the games that Cantr competes with on those "Vote for Cantr!" websites give in-game rewards for voting).

And a more accommodating website is at the forefront for me. More visuals with the ability to turn them off (so the hardcore RP niche don't become disenfranchised) will open the game up to a whole world of new arrivals, and allow for a larger subset of the potential demographic.

Much of this can be done by engaging and empowering the community.

[Friar Briar]

is to open source it.

I also came to this conclusion some time ago. It feels like the most natural way for Cantr to evolve.

[Piscator]

The GAB are supposed to be responsible for this but naturally they are conservatives.

I don't know about the current GAB, but in my time, I had the impression that it was in fact the conservatism of the playerbase, that was hampering progress. Not that individual players are particularly conservative as such, but since the negative consequences of a change are usually much more readily apparent than the positive ones, the immediate response to any change will usually be negative. You need to be pretty convinced of your ideas to implement them against this kind of resistance.

As for my reasons for not playing at the moment, it has indeed much to do with the lack of blank canvases. The game is basically fine as it is, but choking from the build-up of player-generated content. While the ability to have a rich history is actually one of the stronger points of the game, at the time I left, it had gotten increasingly difficult to find white spots on the figurative canvas to make an impact of your own.
Or to use another metaphor, it's hard to have fun in a sandbox infinitely, when all the sand castles are reinforced with concrete.