Why Cantr failed

[Chris]

The guy or girl who comes in last in a Special Olympics race deserves cheering and pats on the back and encouragement. However, even he or she hopes for more, even if it's not realistic. Perhaps the word "failure" is too much of a downer for some. Let me suggest that in the next game, you have some objective metrics for judging success, and when those metrics fall, you make appropriate adjustments. It's possible to call something a failure without calling everyone involved losers or saying that all the time and effort were useless. We tried, we failed, we learned something, and we move on.

Anyone remember the animal migration fiasco? Good times!

[curious]

Cantr hasn't failed... some of it's players might have though.
(and no... I won't qualify that... just think about your game.)

[cutecuddlydirewolf]

I still personally feel like there's hope, assuming we could get more players for the game. Nothing is inherently broken or wrong with Cantr- it just lacks players, and subsequently, a large population.

[Chris]

Cantr hasn't failed... some of it's players might have though.
(and no... I won't qualify that... just think about your game.)

Blaming the players is a sure sign of denial. Every game has players who don't act in the spirit of things. Managing them is part of the enterprise, and not doing it well is a major flaw, often a fatal flaw.

[Jos Elkink]

It's possible to call something a failure without calling everyone involved losers or saying that all the time and effort were useless. We tried, we failed, we learned something, and we move on.

Sure, I totally agree. I just don't agree Cantr is in that category

[jfrizz51423]

I do believe that the main problem currently is the lack of players, because this game has always been more fun the more players there are In order to do that, I believe that 100% of the time should be focused on marketing for quite awhile, and possibly designing an interface that is a lot more attractive and easier to use for players. Also making it easier for players to create an account and immediately start playing.

Jos, it's interesting that you say that the game has not exactly become what you had hoped it would be. Not enough drama, politics, wars, etc. Everyone in the game has it too easy. I believe that the main way to change this is to create a scarcity of resources, along with resources that don't last forever. Food spoils, tools break or rust, even buildings need to be repaired all the time. You say you're worried about the game then becoming too focused on people simply repairing items all the time, but I believe that since to repair something, you need to use more resources, then it will still create the desired effect that you want. I also don't think it'd be too late to implement something such as money.

Also Jos, something I found really interesting was how you said that your dream Cantr game would be a visual world. How do you think that would work? Because I personally think that would be super awesome.

Also can I just say that I am genuinely surprised how much attention this thread has gotten

[curious]

Cantr hasn't failed... some of it's players might have though.
(and no... I won't qualify that... just think about your game.)

Blaming the players is a sure sign of denial. Every game has players who don't act in the spirit of things. Managing them is part of the enterprise, and not doing it well is a major flaw, often a fatal flaw.

Denial? Not sure I am 'that' sure it's a sign of anything. What do you mean by it exactly? My denial? Of what? The game mechanics have somehow gotten worse? The team have gotten worse (which makes more sense to me as you mention players being managed better)?

Let me be plain here... consider Cantr the paper or, canvass. All I am suggesting (and I wouldn't be so bold as you to reify anything as a 'sure' thing... is that all that seems lacking to me is the creativity that used to emerge on the Cantr pages, and yes, I would agree with some of the posters here that there may be an overabundance of resources etc but... say for instance... maintaining a sleeping town leader is not creative and really has nothing at all to do with 'the team' or 'game mechanics'... it is and always will be a player thing.

Just because Cantr seems full... overpainted or whatever... does not mean it can't be painted over again.

[Rmak]

Cantr hasn't failed... some of it's players might have though.
(and no... I won't qualify that... just think about your game.)

Blaming the players is a sure sign of denial. Every game has players who don't act in the spirit of things. Managing them is part of the enterprise, and not doing it well is a major flaw, often a fatal flaw.

Stagnant games lead to player loss , blaming players is disingenuous

[curious]

blaming players is disingenuous

Not so... it's a perfectly legitimate and 'sincere' position. I blame some players (yes, perhaps a shortage of players in general) but to call me disingenuous because of it? That's erroneous... which is perhaps what you meant?

To be honest... I only commented in this thread because it entertains me... even the title of it... which is just some simple ontological nightmare... making a truth simply by describing one, and making a fragile one at that. I too would like to see the evidence... what is the benchmark for the claim and how do things like player numbers, management style, game mechanics maintenance and changes therein stack up and against what?

[Chris]

I do believe that the main problem currently is the lack of players, because this game has always been more fun the more players there are

I don't know how many times I have read this about marketing. Sure, there is some tiny and shrinking demographic that can be better tapped. However, the continuing decline of players and characters shows that the game just can't compete in its category any more. I have seen so many people come here, start 15 characters, be super-enthusiastic for a month or a year, and then burn out. Turnover isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the player count shows that the kind of turnover we have isn't sustainable.

[curious]

I do believe that the main problem currently is the lack of players, because this game has always been more fun the more players there are

I don't know how many times I have read this about marketing. Sure, there is some tiny and shrinking demographic that can be better tapped. However, the continuing decline of players and characters shows that the game just can't compete in its category any more. I have seen so many people come here, start 15 characters, be super-enthusiastic for a month or a year, and then burn out. Turnover isn't necessarily a bad thing, but the player count shows that the kind of turnover we have isn't sustainable.

I actually agree with this. A flaw in the actual game for me is the inability to remove just one two or so undesirable chars. It's all in or nothing.
I myself have started and ended playing this game on two occasions now... the first time I negotiated a gradual 'out' but all my chars went... the second time I just hit the self destruct button.
I know people might argue that players will just keep the mighty and wealthy chars but I don't believe that this would be so... I have a couple of chars (of only 5 granted) that are not in good areas, but I enjoy the challenge of them living during tougher times.

Text based is 'old fashioned' by modern standards... Cantr will not compete well with the likes of the Pokemon-age game players... thus, getting new players? Nah... not gonna happen... but invigorating the older ones? Has to be worth a try. Maybe the islands should be stricken with locusts or some other apocalypse, and people might rise to the challenge?

[jfrizz51423]

I actually agree with this. A flaw in the actual game for me is the inability to remove just one two or so undesirable chars. It's all in or nothing.

I understand this. You end up with people who just neglect half of their characters, since the other half are the ones that lead interesting lives. The problem of "poor players" could be solved if you could remove unwanted characters with the click of a button, by immediately killing them. The only thing worse in this game than having too few players, is having too many sleepers.

Text based is 'old fashioned' by modern standards... Cantr will not compete well with the likes of the Pokemon-age game players... thus, getting new players? Nah... not gonna happen... but invigorating the older ones? Has to be worth a try. Maybe the islands should be stricken with locusts or some other apocalypse, and people might rise to the challenge?

See, I think you're wrong here. Yes, it's a niche community, but I'm telling you, if this game made some improvements that people are listing in this thread and also put itself out there more, then the people who are in love with this niche type of game would be happy to hear about it. I might be wrong, but I honestly think that the only reason people think that marketing wouldn't attract more players, is because you don't hear about many people asking for a game like this. I think it's more of a thing where people don't realize this is what they wanted, until they hear about it!

Invigorating the old ones is of course important too! I'm down for an apocalypse.

[Tiamo]

Creating more external challenges, or threats, i.m.o. is not the way to go. Positive incentives always beat negative ones. For a character to be able to achieve diverse, rare/unique, notable/memorable things within Cantr (by smart gameplay, group efforts, lots of imagination and maybe a little luck) is a much better reason to enjoy playing the game. Not just gathering wealth and/or enjoying a nice roleplaying experience. A sense of achievement is the best motivator i know.
Cantr could also do with a somewhat faster pace of in-game developments. Players today have no patience at all.

[cutecuddlydirewolf]

I actually agree with this. A flaw in the actual game for me is the inability to remove just one two or so undesirable chars. It's all in or nothing.

I understand this. You end up with people who just neglect half of their characters, since the other half are the ones that lead interesting lives. The problem of "poor players" could be solved if you could remove unwanted characters with the click of a button, by immediately killing them. The only thing worse in this game than having too few players, is having too many sleepers.

Text based is 'old fashioned' by modern standards... Cantr will not compete well with the likes of the Pokemon-age game players... thus, getting new players? Nah... not gonna happen... but invigorating the older ones? Has to be worth a try. Maybe the islands should be stricken with locusts or some other apocalypse, and people might rise to the challenge?

See, I think you're wrong here. Yes, it's a niche community, but I'm telling you, if this game made some improvements that people are listing in this thread and also put itself out there more, then the people who are in love with this niche type of game would be happy to hear about it. I might be wrong, but I honestly think that the only reason people think that marketing wouldn't attract more players, is because you don't hear about many people asking for a game like this. I think it's more of a thing where people don't realize this is what they wanted, until they hear about it!

Invigorating the old ones is of course important too! I'm down for an apocalypse.

This. Absolutely all of this.

I was introduced to the game by a friend, who kind of dragged me into playing. I instantly fell in love. This game holds a very special place in my heart, since it's what sparked my interest in roleplaying.

I have no doubt that we CAN get more players. We really do just need to focus on marketing.

[PaintedbyRoses]

We need to focus on marketing to role players and story tellers rather than gamers. Not role players who are into role playing games but people who are into real-life role playing. Also, I think marketing to fan fiction writers would be very lucrative.

We need to market this as something other than a game because it isn't a game.