Rip Van Winkell

[Schme]

The only directive of the Resource Department is "stimulating an interesting economy".........

I move we depose the staff and put him in charge.

How? Well, with guns, of course.

[Michabean]

Okay, I just have to step in here for a minute because I can't stomach this any longer. Saztronic is my brother in real life. I have had to live under the shadow of his supreme intelligence and cleverness my whole life. So, enough with the accolades, people. His family will have to put up with his inflated ego after this.

By the way, in the interest of benevolence, can I have a cookie too, West?

[saztronic]

You want a cookie, you gotta off-quote Shakespeare. Them's the rules.

As for my ego, if it got that big from getting some nice comments on the Cantr forum, that would be.... well, if not sad, then at least curious. Besides, no one in our family but you would care.

Now go away, before I come chase you with a yardstick.

[Duckers]

Well said, my man. Well said.

[Michabean]

[Mykey]

In it something is. Now all is clear, I thank for the help in this question.

[Jur Schagen]

Hey all.

Having lurked on this thread and a few others like it, I'll comment on some of the issues raised. Please note that I haven't done much staff work for the last six months, but that I have been (partly) responsible for several changes that are being complained about.

First, the staff's chars influencing game developments. This accusation is true. We base our design decisions on IG problems as our chars experience them. That doesn't mean we "help" our chars by design features, though. We also design stuff to harden the life of our own chars if we find that a particular thing is "too easy" for them. I ran a pirate when tiredness was introduced; I ran a major company when deterioration was introduced. I've never had a char in a place infested with dangerous animals though, and even though we listen to reports about life being too difficult there, it isn't first-hand experience, and harder to base design changes on. We percieve the game through the eyes of our chars, and that is our only first-hand experience. So yes, the accusation is true, but I can't see a solution for it, and argue the fact that we "help" our own chars with it.

Breaches by db access rights abuse. Yes, it has happened; but it has happened on a few occasions only, and it has always been dealt with if it was found out (and we have tools to monitor that). I also have reason to believe that, eventually, anyone doing it WILL be found out. That's about all I can say.

About the "database poisoning" of Sociologist's char. This may have been a case like that. However, there were about five people around at the time that could have done it (it requires unlimited database access, only available to senior members of ProgD). Of those that had access at the time, there's only one that I could suspect, and he doesn't have those rights anymore. But I still think it is more likely that it was a bug. Yes, never seen before, and never after, but hey, these are computers. If a "bit falls off" in some hardware transfer, a number can change. Modern day techniques ensure that it doesn't happen very often; in fact it has almost become extinct, but not entirely. There has at least been one case that I know of (in Cantr) where it happened as well.

The busywork issue. To be honest, I can't believe you're complaining about that. Just imagine. If you spawned in Blojt on Cantr day 1, there were animals and resource slots. That's all. No buildings. No tools. No fatherly figure giving you an initial food ration or a wooden shield. No idea what could be found at the end of those roads. No man in his fifties to work for, hoping he'll drop dead and you'll inherit the keys. Compare that to now, and you know what I mean.

Creeping featurism. There is some merit in those claims; there have definately been ad hoc implementations that weren't fully thought through. But I dare say these were a minority. Yes, there is a guiding principle for all developments. It is this: "To encourage (or even force) chars to cooperate more, without defining _how_ they cooperate, so different kinds of societies can develop".

There have been many projects to do this, but they have all been burdened by the inherent problems of the virtual world - in particular, the extremely small value of life. To list a few:
- the hematite change, forcing chars to go to different places for their iron, which can hardly be done alone;
- item deterioration, forcing wealthy chars to employ people to maintain their wealth (though this hasn't worked because the one-hour repair project evasion. I know the players will riot if this gets fixed, but I still feel it _should_ be fixed to balance the scales);
- the RD work to enhance specialization, and encouraging trade and economy;
- Skills, resource slots, too tired to explain them all...

Making the game harder? Again, I can't believe my ears... all a char needs to survive, technically, is food... and you can still get 8 day rations from one day of farming, all by yourself. Everything else is a luxury (with the possible exception of weapons, but you don't need those in many places either). Now, what exactly is luxury? One definition is the stuff that you have that the others don't have. And making that harder is only making the luxury more. If we had wanted all the chars to have cars, we might just as well have made the car inherent in the char, by simply increasing the walking speed. You want sexy stuff, you work for it. Or even better, you have others work for you.

Suicide. Cantr has its own way of suicide, called starving your char, and I'd say that it is socially accepted, because you're simply ignored, usually...

All this leaves the problem of the low value of life. Bear in mind that the char isn't just competing for the attention of his player with the other chars of that player (an issue somewhat adressed by the 40-day rule), but also with the myriad of other things a player can do in his life than play Cantr. If the player gets a demanding job, a new girkfriend he shags all day, finds a different and more interesting game, his chars will die, no matter how vital they were before. If anyone came up with a solution for that, I'd be really impressed...

Jur.

[Doug R.]

Yes, there is a guiding principle for all developments. It is this: "To encourage (or even force) chars to cooperate more, without defining _how_ they cooperate, so different kinds of societies can develop".

So this priniciple supercedes playability?

[Jur Schagen]

Yes, there is a guiding principle for all developments. It is this: "To encourage (or even force) chars to cooperate more, without defining _how_ they cooperate, so different kinds of societies can develop".

So this priniciple supercedes playability?

No, it doesn't. It's a game, and if it isn't playable, players will walk out and no societies will develop at all.

But that doesn't mean everything should be "nice". There's a jail in Monopoly. You can get busted in blackjack. NPC's can attack you in adventure games. The list goes on. Part of the joy of playing a game is in overcoming problems. And the problems in the Cantr world are very, very small, compared to most games. Between us, I think that's one of the causes of the sleeping disease - the lack of challenge.

If you are referring to the busywork issue, another thought...why is it that people can type IG conversations that go on for pages, yet have big problems with the three clicks to start a repair project?

Jur.

[Doug R.]

I generally agree with you.

I think the concern is that if you "encourage" or "force" too much, i.e. make things overly complex, players will just adopt a "why bother" attitude. You said it yourself, the only thing a player needs in Cantr to survive is food, and everything else is luxury. Anything fabulous requires long-term planning (in the decades scale), and in my experience, most players don't apply themselves in that manner, and that's not something that can be fixed. They would just rather wait around and grab keys. It's easier.

[Missy]

Why is it that I feel like half the people who complain that noone wants to do anything IC anymore aren't even the people doing things IC? The problem here isn't that there isn't anything to inspire IC. It's that people have found out if they bitch and complain and yes that is what it is, that programming and resources will eventually give in. I've watched it happen! RIght in front of my eyes I've seen people in IRC attack resources over a problem and what do you know.......Two weeks later there are changes.


Everyone wanted a staff who would listen to the players and look whats happening. IMO Staff is listening way too much to players. When they didn't, did the forum look like this? Nope. When staff didn't feel obligated" to inform players of changes that might occurr, were these problems here? Staff can't focus on what really is important to the game when they have a 1000 voices in their ears.


People can argue with me if they want, but it's the truth. There's no element of surprise anymore when something new is implemented to even learn how to overcome the implementation because everyone knows it's coming beforehand. Noone's even focusing on the game anymore, we're all playing politics with how the game should be instead of having our chars argue over how a city should be IC.

[saztronic]

Why is it that I feel like half the people who complain that noone wants to do anything IC anymore aren't even the people doing things IC? The problem here isn't that there isn't anything to inspire IC. It's that people have found out if they bitch and complain and yes that is what it is, that programming and resources will eventually give in. I've watched it happen! RIght in front of my eyes I've seen people in IRC attack resources over a problem and what do you know.......Two weeks later there are changes.


Everyone wanted a staff who would listen to the players and look whats happening. IMO Staff is listening way too much to players. When they didn't, did the forum look like this? Nope. When staff didn't feel obligated" to inform players of changes that might occurr, were these problems here? Staff can't focus on what really is important to the game when they have a 1000 voices in their ears.


People can argue with me if they want, but it's the truth. There's no element of surprise anymore when something new is implemented to even learn how to overcome the implementation because everyone knows it's coming beforehand. Noone's even focusing on the game anymore, we're all playing politics with how the game should be instead of having our chars argue over how a city should be IC.

*coughs* Bull***t

Ahem.

On what, exactly, do you base your claims? I still refuse to cop to a characterization of what I'm doing as bitching or complaining. I'm trying to find out what the strategy of the staff is for developing this game. I'm pointing out where certain changes would seem to defy logic, or the existence of any such strategy. It may be the result of what you've said -- that staff are too pliable to peoples' complaints and comments these days. Regardless of the cause, that doesn't change the problem -- that changes are getting made that make people less likely to care how a city should be IC, and therefore less likely to discuss it IC.

My chars are a robust, diverse, and when appropriate, vocal bunch. Some are happy-go-lucky with ne'er a care in the world. Some are taciturn and a bit surly. Some hold positions of power and influence. Some are lucky to have two sticks to rub together. I just don't get how you think you can lump together anyone who dares be persistent in getting to the bottom of something IRL, as people who must not really care about the game or be contributing to it outside the forum.

[The Sociologist]

Yes, there is a guiding principle for all developments. It is this: "To encourage (or even force) chars to cooperate more, without defining _how_ they cooperate, so different kinds of societies can develop".

This is something I can largely agree with. My whole idea is likewise to try and build up in-game cultures. However, you need to place such cooperation in the context of motivation. There should be motivational "hooks" in-game for better roleplaying and cooperation among characters, but you also need to look at what motivates the player. This has become critical.

- item deterioration, forcing wealthy chars to employ people to maintain their wealth

This is where the wheels fell off, so to speak. I am an always have been in favor of what I call entropy, but large numbers of characters doing nothing but repairs is hardly motivational. You need resources to be used in repair projects, then you can radically cut the times involved in doing the repairs themselves. The current effect is that most newcomers to the game may well experience crushingly boring first experiences, back to the issue of player motivation.

Making the game harder? Again, I can't believe my ears...

There is a difference between making the game harder in the sense of more challenging, and making the game tedious. I don't believe people are saying the game should not be challenging. I for one find it in some ways insufficiently challenging. But it has become in many respects tedious. Tiredness, skills and repairs all added to tedium. Which means there was a fault in the philosophy behind the implementation.

Suicide. Cantr has its own way of suicide, called starving your char, and I'd say that it is socially accepted, because you're simply ignored, usually...

That is what I've always used. Never created a suicidal newspawn in my life. But now I am being punished by 40 days in purgatory every time (eg after the Burgeo death). In what way does 40 days in purgatory enhance player motivation?

All this leaves the problem of the low value of life. Bear in mind that the char isn't just competing for the attention of his player with the other chars of that player (an issue somewhat adressed by the 40-day rule), but also with the myriad of other things a player can do in his life than play Cantr. If the player gets a demanding job, a new girkfriend he shags all day, finds a different and more interesting game, his chars will die, no matter how vital they were before. If anyone came up with a solution for that, I'd be really impressed...

Of course, we all accept that there will always be such a thing as the sleeping sickness. However, the current turnover is simply too high. It has destroyed what is called "social capital". No more regular newspapers, no more complex bureaucratic systems like the Lad Empire "Citizen Pay Statements" or Jo Jo's Forest ID, no more MWS price lists, no more... The list is endless. Why no such imposing efforts any longer?

This implies that those players who saw the game as strategic, and who sought to "encourage cooperation and the development of societies" through roleplay, have been driven from the game. Go read 1959Apache's and griogal's reasons why they left the game.

[Edited for some spelling]

[tiddy ogg]

My experience is rather limited, perhaps, but it seems to me that many, (most?) Cantrian towns only have one person controlling/directing/running/holding them together, and in that situation, how can there be much development?
Maybe the game should be targeted at those with plenty of time, the "silver surfers", perhaps.

[Mafia Salad]

Why is it that I feel like half the people who complain that noone wants to do anything IC anymore aren't even the people doing things IC? The problem here isn't that there isn't anything to inspire IC. It's that people have found out if they bitch and complain and yes that is what it is, that programming and resources will eventually give in. I've watched it happen! RIght in front of my eyes I've seen people in IRC attack resources over a problem and what do you know.......Two weeks later there are changes.


Everyone wanted a staff who would listen to the players and look whats happening. IMO Staff is listening way too much to players. When they didn't, did the forum look like this? Nope. When staff didn't feel obligated" to inform players of changes that might occurr, were these problems here? Staff can't focus on what really is important to the game when they have a 1000 voices in their ears.


People can argue with me if they want, but it's the truth. There's no element of surprise anymore when something new is implemented to even learn how to overcome the implementation because everyone knows it's coming beforehand. Noone's even focusing on the game anymore, we're all playing politics with how the game should be instead of having our chars argue over how a city should be IC.

I wholeheartedly endorse this statement.

People look to solve problems in game on the forum instead of in game. Just look at the crowbar repair. Instead of going "Boy these crowbar repair rates are ridiculous, I am going to build a new one when this one starts crumbling so I don't waste my time trying to fix it." People went "94 Hours! That’s ridiculous, do something about that RD." Those kind of things are alright, but it happens so often that finding your own solution is nearly unheard of. I wonder how much time some people spend complaining about problems to staff instead of seeing what they can do to avoid or solve the problems with current game mechanics.

I have an amazing amount of respect for the staff here. They deal with us players day in day out, have real life obligations, and they do it for free. And then no matter what decisions they make half a dozen people will get on their case for it being a bad decision. Some players (including myself on a bad day) go beyond criticism and concerns to insults and cruelty. The stress demands probably kept me away from applying for a staff position a lot more then the time demands did.