Slashdot Mirror


Multi-User Dungeon Pioneer Interviewed

Thanks to Stratics for posting an interview with Richard Bartle, the co-creator of the original text-based multi-user dungeon (MUD) environment. This chat with Bartle, who is also renowned for writing Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDs, an early exploration of the effects of PKing (player killing) on virtual worlds, discusses the current crop of MMORPGs and their likely longevity: "Sooner or later a major world WILL be closed down, but I think they are far more stable then many players realise." Bartle's website also contains a treasure trove of early writings on MUDs, both by Bartle himself and other pioneers, and it's interesting to contrast this new interview with a 1995-era interview with Bartle, in which he foreshadows this new era of graphical MMORPGs.

5 of 23 comments (clear)

  1. "HCSD" is good but ... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I disagree with his assertion that a world "needs" PKs. I played UO for a number of years, and had a lot of friends leave precisely because of PKs. Guess what, getting killed was NOT fun for a lot people -- if a person is not having fun, the game is not a good one.

    1. Re:"HCSD" is good but ... by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think a necessary component of allowing TK's is making the penalty for being killed not that onerous. It sucks to get killed and then lose a level, your equipment, etc, and then have to work your way back up. In addition, PK'ing needs to be tightly controlled, so some level 500 or so player doesnt prey upon some newbie. Confining it to specific areas and allowing it only within certain skill ranges is necessary. In general, it is best to let the noobs run around fighting NPC's, allowing only the higher level characters to kill each other- especially since they are more involved in the game and therefore better equipped to handle it- A player may have a vendetta against another player and use his social connections to seek revenge, and as long as it is all done 'in character' and somewhat maturely, it could add a great storyline to the game.

    2. Re:"HCSD" is good but ... by kulmala · · Score: 5, Informative

      I disagree with his assertion that a world "needs" PKs.


      In the interview, Bartle claims he has made no such assertion:

      [People] seem to know me for [...] writing a paper, "Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players who Suit MUDs," where I advocate PKing. I did write the paper, but I don't advocate PKing in it; rather, I explain what effects of having (or not having) PKers are on virtual worlds, so designers can anticipate the problems associated with their preferred approach.


      And, in HCDS itself, Bartle writes:

      As mentioned earlier, this paper is not intended to promote any one particular style of MUD.


      FWIW, I don't detect any strong pro-PK bias in HCDS. (Back when I used to MUD, I myself disliked PKing.)
      --
      Luke, I am your signature. Search your feelings, you know it to be true...
    3. Re:"HCSD" is good but ... by KDan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I disagree 100%. What's very important is to make absolutely certain that a player who's careful and quick enough can avoid being pk'ed - that there are no ways that you can be pk'ed without any warning. Ie, give every player a fair chance of getting out of it alive no matter how good the pk'er is.

      However, making the pk onerous is a requirement for there to be pk's at all! For instance, in Diablo 2 (not hardcore mode though) there is no pkilling. It's all a joke, because you don't lose anything except a little bit of xp and some gold, so no one really cares about being pk'ed. On this mud I used to play, though, where you lost everything you were carrying, not to mention 1/3 of a level of xp (and there were only 30 levels overall, so that was a lot), and with the possiblity of losing stats points if you lost a level, dying *really* mattered. That gave you a very good motivation to:
      1) Form groups of trusted players that you knew weren't going to pk you.
      2) Be very aware of what other groups/clans/lone assholes were known to pk randomly so that you could get away quickly if you met them.
      3) Never leave your character sitting on his ass in the wilderness - only do that in 'safe rooms' like the inn and the guilds and such, cause otherwise even a clueless newbie could kill you.
      4) Always carry the essential stuff to get away from anywhere quick (ie several scrolls of recall, and wear a lucky charm to prevent other people from summoning you).

      These all made the game much more fun, because there was an element of risk. I never saw a single person complain that this mud was not balanced pk-wise, though at some points in the faraway past (before I started playing it) it had some unbalances such as a clan taking over the fountain of a major city and charging coins to allow people to fill their waterskins, on penalty of death. Even that was referred to by all with some fondness though.

      Even when I got pk'ed, I could always point the finger to one point where I panicked and didn't do the right thing or didn't know the right thing, and fucked up. I had the means to avoid pk. That's how it should be balanced.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    4. Re:"HCSD" is good but ... by (trb001) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most of the time, when people say that PKing is needed, I would agree with this caveat...PKing is one of many different ways to play a game. Exploration, questing, building, these are all important too. PKers are important, IMHO, because they add and indeterminate amount of danger to a world.

      Imagine a world with no PKing...what mortal dangers does your character really face. It's not a real world simulation if you can't kill each other. Now, as many have pointed out, your typical PKer would walk into a room with you, slay you, and be headed off to the next room to kill your buddy before you could type 'Ho there!'. Most players could probably be described as 'jackasses'. That doesn't mean, however they aren't necessary. What is necessary is a way to curtail the behavior so that, just as in the real world, there are consequences for your actions. If you kill another player that happens to be good alignment, I would imagine the local authorities aren't going to like you. As with the real world, you best make sure you can handle the authorities and the gangs of do-gooders that will come around looking to snag the price on your head.

      I do think PKing is essential...I don't a game should promote ONLY PKing (a lot of MUDs advertised for that, and I failed to see how they kept a user base).

      --trb