Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Designing Virtual Worlds

Posted by timothy on from the placing-trees-and-tribbles dept.

Mahrin Skel (Dave Rickey) writes "When I wrote up my Engines of Creation column for August 12th with a focus on Dr. Richard Bartle's Designing Virtual Worlds , I had no idea it was the closest thing to an independent review the book had yet received. I hadn't intended my column as a review, but simply as nit-picking over an almost theological point of disagreement between my philosophy of game design and that of Dr. Bartle. My intended audience was the normal readers of my column, mostly other people already working in the Online Games industry." Rickey provides a review of Bartle's book for a more general audience below, and explains his reasoning for doing so. Designing Virtual Worlds author Richard A. Bartle pages 768 publisher New Riders rating Very Good reviewer Dave Rickey ISBN 0131018167 summary An overview of Virtual World Design by one of the field's founders

It never occurred to me that my review would be read by a wider public, most of whom had never heard of me or even Dr. Bartle, and would see only the hostility, and not understand the narrowness of the focus. When the column was picked up by Slashdot I was stunned, when I realized it was also linked by Clay Shirky in Many to Many and by Joystick101 among other places, I felt slightly ill. Without intending to, I may have damaged the reputation of Dr. Bartle and of his book, and I feel an obligation to set the record straight with an actual review of his book. I'm not sure why it has not already received such a review, except that only a few dozen people in the world currently make their living at virtual world design and would really be qualified to write it.

What is in the book? The "Introduction to Virtual Worlds" of the first chapter does a very good job of laying out what a virtual world is, and defending that definition as a category that includes but is not limited to the online games that are the most common examples of the type. The history lesson included a lot of information even I, after six years in the industry and a serious attempt at studying it, was not aware of. The second chapter gives a very good overview of the process by which the world is created both in business terms and in structural arrangements. The third includes a reprise and updating of Dr. Bartle's now-classic Players that Suit MUD's, the touchstone for every theory of player motivation in online games, and continues into a description of the properties and dynamics of the communities that form in and around the worlds.

Where most of the first three chapters are a primer -- containing the base knowledge needed to understand the whole field in functional terms -- the 4th and 5th chapters focus much more on the worlds as games. The mechanics of game systems, the structure of "advancement" systems and the psychology that makes them run, all of the myriad elements that make a virtual world a game.

Chapters 6 and 7 take a more academic overview of the field, discussing the "why's" of the worlds, what they are, what they may become, and what other fields of human endeavour they are most similar to and therefore may have lessons to offer. Chapter 7's effort to establish the academic and artistic "legitimacy" of virtual worlds was the main source of my disagreement with the book: I think that virtual worlds are entirely capable of standing on their own merits and do not need to be considered credible by the academic arts to be worthy. But this is the "almost theological" issue, and although significant to myself and a handful of others in the field, it's not something that should be counted against the work as a whole.

Chapter 8 focuses on the fact that as virtual as the worlds may be, the people in them (and therefore the relationships) are real, and therefore certain ethical factors normally not considered an issue in game design become much more important. Added to this are questions of "ownership"; if there is no game without the players, but the operator has a finger on the power button, who is in control? Who should be? The book doesn't solve many of these problems (every solution is likely to be unique to a particular setting), but does lay out where most of the fracture lines occur.

What I liked: The book establishes good points and brings the reader up to date on the known principles of the field, with copious references to other writings on the subject provided in the footnotes. The general focus on the "players eye" view is a very important attribute: too often, discussions of virtual worlds have the "God's Eye" designer's view from orbit, and forget that in the end it's the ground-level "fun or not-fun" experience of the players that makes or breaks a design.

What I didn't like: Dr. Bartle is much more broadly educated than I am (they don't give out any titles for an Associates degree in electronics), and tries very hard to make a case to the academic community that virtual worlds are worthy of consideration as serious works of Capital-A "Art." Since I am not concerned about credibility with the dilettantes and dabblers who make up most of academia in the Arts, the repeated references to the Hero's Journey and the effort to define a dramatic theory of online games in Chapter 7 distracted and occasionally annoyed me. But those interested in such things will probably find his efforts there as workmanlike as the rest of the volume.

Summary: This book is a must-read for anyone who works in the field of online games, and highly recommended for anyone who wants to understand the theory and structure of the systems that make them run, or to effectively discuss them with the teams that work on them.

You can purchase Designing Virtual Worlds from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

113 comments

  1. Don't be upset. by Prince_Ali · · Score: 1, Funny

    Don't be upset that slashdotters may have taken your article out of context. That is just what we do.

    --
    Slashdotter are stupid and biased.
  2. More info on the author... by camilita · · Score: 5, Informative
    Since the topic is interesting to me I did a quick search on his name. This is part of the information of the author that can be found in the detail of the book:
    Richard Allan Bartle, Ph.D., co-wrote the first virtual world, MUD ("Multi-User Dungeon"), in 1978, thus being at the forefront of the online gaming industry from its very inception. A former university lecturer in Artificial Intelligence, he is an influential writer on all aspects of virtual world design and development. As an independent consultant, he has worked with almost every major online gaming company in the U.K. and the U.S. over the past 20 years. Richard lives with his...
    1. Re:More info on the author... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, in 1978 MUDs might have been at the forefront, now they are not anywhere near mainstream gaming.

    2. Re:More info on the author... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hay guys! So what's going on in th

    3. Re:More info on the author... by dhall · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dr. Bartle was a trend setter for a genre that is still in it's growth stage. Much like how Gordon Moore was able to set words to a trend that was formulating before him, Bartle attempted to attach theories to a microcosm of online societies.

      Without intending to, I may have damaged the reputation of Dr. Bartle and of his book, and I feel an obligation to set the record straight with an actual review of his book.

      Nice to know that Dave attempts to offset his first treatise with an almost narcissistic comment. A thorough review of Dave's background, as well as following his comments on various boards when he worked for Mythic Entertainment will show a clear disdain for his predecessors within the industry. An egocentrism that seems to permeate most "Devs" for online games that goes all the way down to MUD's.

      Bartle is not a Fred Brooks or Don Knuth, but his background, his past accomplishments and achievements does tend to merit more weighing to his analysis and prose.

  3. If Dr. Bartle says one thing by DrWhizBang · · Score: 4, Funny

    you can bet that Dr. James will back him up...

    --
    Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    1. Re:If Dr. Bartle says one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      insightful? A reference to a wine cooler brand name is modded insightful? Wow.

      Maybe funny...maybe.

    2. Re:If Dr. Bartle says one thing by curtlewis · · Score: 1, Funny

      Thank you for your suppport.

    3. Re:If Dr. Bartle says one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there anyone else who gets this joke but hasn't chipped in yet? Don't be shy!

  4. Realism vs Fun by angst7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that virtual worlds are entirely capable of standing on their own merits and do not need to be considered credible by the academic arts to be worthy.

    Having played on and assisted in development of a host of muds for over 10 years (ranging from old diku and lp based all the way through EQ, Planetscape, etc...) I would agree 100%. There is no substitute for 'Fun Factor' in a mud. In fact the more reasonable and sensable (our world like) a mud becomes, the less interesting I find it.

    ---
    Jedimom.com, now with twice the pudding!

    --
    StrategyTalk.com, PC Game Forums
    1. Re:Realism vs Fun by farrellj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having worked in a Virtual Reality Gaming Cafe, I can tell you that the more "artificial" a world is, the less "transition sickness", or the disorientation that players get from spending long times in VR is greatly reduced. For example, Decent in full 3D on a good VR headset will generate more transition sickness than say, DOOM would, as Decent has a more "real" environment to the brain.

      ttyl
      Farrell

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    2. Re:Realism vs Fun by Mooncaller · · Score: 1
      As an artist and software designer currently involved with designing on-line games, I am very interested in the artistic potential of the media. I have done a lot of thinking over the last several months on this. Here are some of theroms I am working with, and a conclusion.

      Art can be thought of as a system to abstract and highlight a point of view in some media as a mechinism to communicate.

      Every artistic media has a natural vocabulary that is suitible for the range of that media.

      Artist working in a media will develop extensions to the basic vocabulary. Sets of vocabulaties that are used as a system are often called styles. Styles do not need to map directly onto the natural characteristics of the media. I.e. the audience of the art will need some level of education in order to interpret that art. E.g., Nose bleeding and cat faces in Manga and Anime, or the mechinisms used to express action over time in cave art.

      The more closely a piece of art maps onto the experienced reality of the audience, the less meaningfull it is. E.g. If I say to my friend, "The sky is blue.", he will shrug and think "So, what?" If on the other hand I say "The sun reflecting off those clouds over there is cool", he will be more engaged. That is because I pointed out somethings outside his experienced reality, namely, the clouds themselves, and the fact that I find them cool.

      The effectivness of a piece of art is based on how well it engages its intended audience. In other words, its the intended audience that defines whether a piece of art is good or not.

      One of the characteristics of effective art, is its ability to give the illusion of something that is not there. As an artist, I will put something light next to something dark in order to give the illusion of brightness.

      On-line gaming is clearly an artform, but it also is still in its infancy.

      The more a game maps onto the experienced reality of the player, the less engaging the game will be, and therefore, the less effective it is as art. Which means that it would not be found worthy by the academic arts. Worthiness is based on the richness of the vocabulary, the range of expression, and how well it engages the audience. So academic worthiness is a good thing. Saying that, I need to add that targeting academic acceptence as a goal is futile, as vocabulary and style is developed by the interaction of the artist, the media, and the intended audience. The academic arts community is a pretty limited audience to be developing an artform with!

      So on-line gaming, and gaming in general, will become mature artforms of academic worth through natural processes. Forcing them to be acceptable will not work ( and would be a waste of time). That said, the involvment of interested members of the academic arts community could be a real asset in developing these new artforms.

      P.S. A large portion of the academic arts community is made up of artists. Artsist are, by nature, boundry pushers. The story of art, is the story of pushing boundaries, and the academic arts community has been involved with that pushing. So type casting this community as some collection of hide bound traditionalist who are incapable of understanding anything new, is an error.

  5. Aren't a lot of these problems solved by life? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think a lot of these problems can be solved simply by observation of the real world, and then deciding to either subset it or superset it. It is easy to think of current existence as a black box with certain properties, that one would either want to take a subset of those properties, or extend them in some way. I don't think it takes a special book -- if you're looking for a book on life, try all the millions of great novels out there. Those writers (i.e. Steinbeck) present a lot of information about the design of a world in the way that they create their "virtual worlds".

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:Aren't a lot of these problems solved by life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Those writers (i.e. Steinbeck) present a lot of information about the design of a world in the way that they create their "virtual worlds".

      I both agree and disagree.

      From a pure "model a world" point of view, both fiction and the real world are necessary inputs.

      However, when one is designing a virtual world (or multiple virtual worlds) for gameplay, there are more considerations. Fiction is not a particularly good input, since the bulk of fiction is a linear experience of one form or another. A virtual world being played in parallel by hundreds, thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of players necessarily needs to fulfill different goals.

      (An accurate, or even only marginally idealized, simulation of the real world wouldn't necessarily make a lot of great gaming.)

      Although drawing on fiction is interesting from a world-building point of view, it's rarely instructive. Most fictional worlds exist only to serve the story -- the Tolkien approach is much, much rarer (where the backstory was sketched in years before he wrote anything, and then he picked an interesting point in the history of his world to write about).

      And even if authors do occasionally do the "create the world in extreme detail, then write about some tiny bit of it" thing, the novels won't have those details -- you'd be better served with the notes leading into the novel.

      Even having those background notes, however, is still not enough, because one of the goals would be to present satisfying gameplay for many people simultaneously. This is very, very different from creating a single story which thousands of people read separately -- this is handling thousands of people being in different stages of a story at the same time, while allowing them the ability to divert it, change the outcome, or just explore the world and ignore the story altogether.

      Novels and real life are interesting source materials, but there's a whole lot more to making an interesting world to interact in than reading Steinbeck. (Of Mice and Men as MMORPG -- yes, you too can play a migrant farm worker in Depression-era America! And pay $10/mo for the privilege, which is probably more than those workers took home!)

    2. Re:Aren't a lot of these problems solved by life? by LeoDV · · Score: 1

      Getting out in the real world instead of playing with manipulative mechanics? Are you new here?

  6. How many others by phorm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Start breathing a little more rapidly after discovering that their article (or worse website) has been posted up on a major site such as slashdot. Pending bandwidth disasters aside, many things are meant to be shared with the general "world-at-large," but not with a large portion of the world. More scary is when they only focus on part of a story or opinion, leading to the appearing of bias on the part of the writer.

    It's nice to see that not only did Mr Rickey put in a "full-opinion" follow-up, but that /. was good enough to post it up.

    Personally, I have a lot of stories, postings, etc that I really have no problem sharing with a random interested netter... but having several thousand people poring over and commenting on it would make me a bit green.

    A lot of slashdotters write that "if you don't want it read, don't post it"... but really there's a difference between putting something up so that global interested parties can check it out, and having it swarmed on by the masses. Makes me wonder if I should append a "property of owner XYZ, please do not copy or link this article without permission"... at least to cover my ass in some form if such an article got in the wild.

    1. Re:How many others by stratjakt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You think slashdot is bad?

      Pray you aren't linked to by a truly massive portal site like msn.com or yahoo, or a large news site like cnn.com or msnbc.

      CNN stuck a link to the small company I work for in an article about a year back. A slashdotting might last an hour or two, we were pummelled for weeks.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:How many others by Trigun · · Score: 0

      It really kills my torrent downloads, that's for sure.

    3. Re:How many others by MegaFur · · Score: 2, Insightful
      A lot of slashdotters write that "if you don't want it read, don't post it"... but really there's a difference between putting something up so that global interested parties can check it out, and having it swarmed on by the masses. Makes me wonder if I should append a "property of owner XYZ, please do not copy or link this article without permission"... at least to cover my ass in some form if such an article got in the wild.

      I agree with you that there's a difference between something you want only a few people to see and something you want truly everyone to see. IMHO however, once you put it on the Web, all bets are off. To put it more bluntly, if you were to put something on the web and then say "please do not copy or link this article without permission" I will happily ignore your claim. I might even post some links to it out of spite.

      --
      Furry cows moo and decompress.
    4. Re:How many others by srmalloy · · Score: 1
      Makes me wonder if I should append a "property of owner XYZ, please do not copy or link this article without permission"... at least to cover my ass in some form if such an article got in the wild.

      If your site is on someone else's hostserver, you're pretty much SOL for doing anything about it, but if you are running on your own webserver, you should be able to go into the server configuration and configure your site so that articles are restricted by the HTTP-REFERER header field (admittedly, it can be spoofed, but it's better than nothing), so that your webserver denies direct linking to the articles unless you've specifically configured your server to allow linking to an article from a particular host, which you wouldn't do until you got a request to link.

      Doing this can still get you slashdotted, because denying a connection still takes system resources, but you don't face the bandwidth costs of serving N+1 the article to an arbitrarily large number of requests. They would still be able to link to the root of your website and traverse the site to the article, but that's cumbersome enough that it's not practical to do for a link to the article such as those in most /. articles.
    5. Re:How many others by phorm · · Score: 1

      I might even post some links to it out of spite.

      Then your an asshole. Now, if you had a huge portal or site like slashdot, and I had said article crouched in legaleze, and you still posted the damn link, you might even be liable for the huge f**ing bandwidth charges that are likely incurred if you flagrantly ignored such a notice.

      Hopefully, slashdot editors would not be so ignorant as to disregard such a warning.

      Website owners should be able to have some exectation that if they put up reasonable warnings then they don't have to put passwords or logins etc etc on every bloody page just to avoid the slashdot flood.

      I'm assuming that you don't run servers, because such a claim is simply ignorance and I wouldn't expect it from anybody who knows the work it takes to provide such a service (for free, more often than not).

    6. Re:How many others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Then you're an asshole. Now, if you had a huge portal or site like slashdot, and I had said article crouched in legaleze, and you still posted the damn link, you might even be liable for the huge f**ing bandwidth charges that are likely incurred if you flagrantly ignored such a notice.... Website owners should be able to have some expectation that if they put up reasonable warnings then they don't have to put passwords or logins etc etc on every bloody page just to avoid the slashdot flood.

      You keep using the term "web site". I do not think it means what you think it means.

    7. Re:How many others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you are certainly an asshole.

      And since you seem to be that most mawkish and despised of creatures, a furry, it goes without saying that you are also a fat, socially disabled, sweaty, malodorous cocksucker.

      Please, oh please do not kill youself! (sure hope your spite is acting up today)

    8. Re:How many others by randyest · · Score: 1

      if you had a huge portal or site like slashdot, and I had said article crouched in legaleze, and you still posted the damn link, you might even be liable for the huge f**ing bandwidth charges that are likely incurred if you flagrantly ignored such a notice.

      Sure, and I might be able to fart a dialtone, but it's highly unlikely.

      In terms of who can read what when and how, posting something anywhere on the web without security (warnings and disclaimers are not security) is no different from writing it down and nailing it to a tree in a public place (other than the latter may be more easily taken down). You have to deal with it if 0, 1, or 10e6 people read your sign, and it doesn't matter that you're paying for the BW. You don't have to pay for the bandwidth, or even have a website for that matter.

      Website owners should be able to have some exectation that if they put up reasonable warnings then they don't have to put passwords or logins etc etc on every bloody page just to avoid the slashdot flood.

      No, they shouldn't (and don't) have any such expectation unless they are deluded.

      I'm assuming that you don't run servers, because such a claim is simply ignorance and I wouldn't expect it from anybody who knows the work it takes to provide such a service (for free, more often than not).

      Eh? No offense, but you seem to be suffering from the ignorance here. And the "work" involved is irrelevant. If you choose to put info in a publicly-accessible place, for free or not, you may or may not be /.'ed (or similar). As someone who does run servers and has had websites hammered into oblivion from ill-preparedness and unexpected popularity, I think it's naive (and wrong) to expect webvisitors to adhere to your warnings or disclaimers about linking. You'll have a hard enough time getting them to respect your (c)opyrights (which unlike your warnings are legally enforceable, though not very practical in most cases to pursue), much less your whimsical, arbitrary admonitions against links.

      I'm sorry to break it to you since you seem rather upset by this stark reality (and the "asshole" that would link for fun or spite), but them's the facts. And that's the way it should be too, IMHO. Finding ways to limit access to your "publicly available data" is left as an exercise for the reader.

      --
      everything in moderation
    9. Re:How many others by phorm · · Score: 1

      I think it's naive (and wrong) to expect webvisitors to adhere to your warnings or disclaimers about linking

      But I suppose you think SPAM is wrong. But then... you have an email that is globally accessible too, for many even guessable. So I guess you should be securing that better too and tough luck if you get spammed with 100 goatse's in a day?

      It's called a "reasonable expection from a reasonable human being." Unfortunately, with the attitude of people today, reasonable expectation is that you will meet unreasonable people (aka the a**holes aforementioned).

      It's a sign of the degradation of society... "ain't a problem unless it's hurtin' me," correct?

    10. Re:How many others by randyest · · Score: 1

      But I suppose you think SPAM is wrong.

      Annoying sometimes, yes. Wrong? Well, it's not illegal, most of it is not immoral (IMHO). I don't like it, but I'm not sure it's wrong.

      So I guess you should be securing that better too and tough luck if you get spammed with 100 goatse's in a day?

      Well, the mildly-obfuscated email of mine here on /. is a spam account I rarely pay much attention to (unless /. is mentioned in the subject line), so it's not a problem. I take responsible steps to make sure my main email is safe from abuse (and, having a domain means I can easily make new emails as needed), and yes, tough luck if I do (other than I can take steps to filter, file, or block the stuff).

      I think I'd like some laws to help curb spam, but as others have noted, they probably woudln't work anyway. Similarly, I think laws against linking to websites won't work, but contrastingly, I would not like some laws to try. I think technical means are the way to go if you want to provide limited access to info on your little part of the www. This has been discussed on /. many times, and some might agree with your position that one should be responsible for ignoring a do-not-link notice on a site, I think everyone pretty much realizes that this is not the case, like it or not.

      It's called a "reasonable expection from a reasonable human being." Unfortunately, with the attitude of people today, reasonable expectation is that you will meet unreasonable people (aka the a**holes aforementioned).

      You're new in this world, aren't you? :). Seriously, the problem with that sort of statement is that everyone has a different idea of what's reasonable. To wit: you think do-not-link warnings should be binding, and I don't. We can both still be reasonable. Another example: I think it's unreasonable to call someone an asshole for having a different definition of the word reasonable than youurs, even if they do threaten to emphasize this disagreement with spiteful action.

      It's a sign of the degradation of society... "ain't a problem unless it's hurtin' me," correct?

      Well, no, not correct. Not at all what I said or meant. In fact, the opposite is true. Read my post -- I said I have been hurt by this sort of thing, the difference is I learned from the experience and fixed it for the future. You, on the other hand, seem to prefer to use your energy to complain about it rather than implement fairly simple technical controls (such as putting "passwords or logins etc etc on every bloody page") that don't rely on: visitors to understand your warning, visitors to heed your warning, and new laws to punish them if they don't.

      --
      everything in moderation
    11. Re:How many others by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1
      A lot of slashdotters write that "if you don't want it read, don't post it"... but really there's a difference between putting something up so that global interested parties can check it out, and having it swarmed on by the masses. Makes me wonder if I should append a "property of owner XYZ, please do not copy or link this article without permission"... at least to cover my ass in some form if such an article got in the wild.

      I have a friend whose site was hammered by a major media outlet -- other than Slashdot -- and got stuck with a four-digit bandwidth bill. It seems to me that there ought to be some legal liability there, considering anyone running a high-volume website like Slashdot or CNN must know the costs involved in sustaining that kind of traffic.

      There are some things you can do, depending on the level of control you have over your site.
      • Use Javascript to redirect users when their referer header contains "slashdot", "cnn", and so on. The drawback to this is that it's an all-or-nothing sort of thing and it only protects you against sites you already know about.
      • Use a server-side scripting language to maintain hit counts per referring domain on a short time interval -- 15 minutes to an hour -- and begin redirecting loads when they exceed a certain rate. The drawback to this is that you have to have access to a server-side scripting language.
      • Do it at the server level. There are a number of existing Apache modules that throttle usage on a per-IP basis; presumably it wouldn't be too terribly difficult to write a module to do it on a per-referer basis. Maybe such a module already exists.
      • Last but not least, make sure your hosting provider will at least pull the plug on your site before a pre-arranged bandwidth cost is exceeded. This may or may not be practical for many commercial sites, but it makes good sense for non-commercial and personal sites.

      Of course, the best solution would be for commercial sites (and that includes Slashdot) not to abuse the nice people whose freely-available content helps sell their advertising. If it were me, I'd ask permission to copy the desired content into the story body. (Of course, if it were me, everyone on my staff would be able to spell "ludicrous" and "ridiculous" correctly, and there would occasionally be some basic fact-checking.)
      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    12. Re:How many others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Makes me wonder if I should append a "property of owner XYZ, please do not copy or link this article without permission"... at least to cover my ass in some form if such an article got in the wild.


      You can't forbid people from linking to your article... that is precisely what it means to make it available on the web!
  7. Misnomer... by kneecarrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Calling the environments created in the glut of recent MMORPG "virtual worlds" is a disservice to the term. Most of these so-called worlds are woefully small in scope and the inhabitants reduced to a very small subset of brainless activities.

    --

    I always save my last mod point to mod up a good troll. You people are too serious.

    1. Re:Misnomer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of these so-called worlds are woefully small in scope and the inhabitants reduced to a very small subset of brainless activities.

      Just like your moms basement. But thats the whole 'world' to many posters here.

    2. Re:Misnomer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Most of these so-called worlds are woefully small in scope and the inhabitants reduced to a very small subset of brainless activities.

      Sounds like the real world to me.
  8. Whats not to like? by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dr. Bartle is much more broadly educated than I am

    I like books written by people more educated than myself, that way I learn things. If you want to feel intellectually superior, check out the local thrift/used book shop for some old "choose your own adventure"s

    Or read anything by Grisham or Clancy.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    1. Re:Whats not to like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
      I like books written by people more educated than myself, that way I learn things. If you want to feel intellectually superior, check out the local thrift/used book shop for some old "choose your own adventure"s
      Bet you never beat The Warlock Of Firetop Mountain without cheating.
    2. Re:Whats not to like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Or read anything by Grisham or Clancy.

      Obviously you are feeling rather intellectually superior.

    3. Re:Whats not to like? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      It's just that its brainless pulp fiction. No thought required. Just a story about a submarine or dinosaurs or something. Not that it's all that terrible if that's what you feel like reading.

      To be somewhat closer to topic, it's like video games. Sometimes I like a more thought-inducing RPG or adventure, with obscure puzzles and whatnot to figure out (I miss the infocom days - puzzles today seem to be "find 4 red magic blocks"), sometimes I like to just blow shit up or punch guys out.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  9. Hey you were that jerk GM of Povar, right? by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    Ha, but I'm guessing you were just following the rules of Verant. Must be great to be out there doing something instead of banning people for "kill stealing".

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
    1. Re:Hey you were that jerk GM of Povar, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, maybe...but I think his main claim to fame was working on DAoC. You know that completely fucked up economy that's in the game? That's all his.

  10. They are just games by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    People like to go on profound, philosophical meanderings about MMOGs and MUDs all of the time. I have played a lot of them. You know what? They ain't nothing but games. The difference between "virtual worlds" and your average role playing game is that companies that run MMOGs can get away with making sub-par games and provide crappy customer service. This is because the target audience for MMOGs have proven that they will actually keep paying for this type of customer service and buggy products.

    It's all so inane to me. They are crappy games, that's all. I wish people would stop trying to find some mystical and spiritual meaning in them.

    1. Re:They are just games by notque · · Score: 2, Funny

      People like to go on profound, philosophical meanderings about MMOGs and MUDs all of the time.

      Obviously you've never played everquest. I mean.. you can DRINK BEER. The screen gets all crazy! It's like, actually drinking beer... but not.

      You've got to try it man.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    2. Re:They are just games by randyest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I pretty much agree with you, so imagine my surprise to find, a few links deep into the posted article, a reference to a case of what someone seriously called a rape in a MUD. This has to be read to be believed.

      --
      everything in moderation
    3. Re:They are just games by Kwil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I see in venerable Slashdot tradition you actually haven't read anything below the opening blurb on the front page. Kudos!

      Had you gone further, you would have seen that these articles have nothing to do with mystical or spiritual meaning, but rather with an attempt to better classify the types of games and/or players, thus leading to a more complete and sound theory of what makes them interesting and to who. By doing this, the hope is that less of the sub-par crap you moan about will be released because people will have a background of knowledge to draw upon and so can see ahead of time when something probably won't work.

      --

      That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

    4. Re:They are just games by reve · · Score: 1

      > The difference between "virtual worlds" and your average role playing game is that companies that run MMOGs can get away with making sub-par games and provide crappy customer service. This is because the target audience for MMOGs have proven that they will actually keep paying for this type of customer service and buggy products.

      Wait... so TSR didn't realease a lot of sub-par games (boot hill? gangbusters?) and provide crappy customer service? Sure they did!

      Their customers may have been bitter, calling them T$R and the like... but they still went out and bought the new source books.

      --
      -- r . m o s q u i t o --
    5. Re:They are just games by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 0
      G-d damn, if that article was not the biggest mess of mental masturbation. It took me 30 minutes of staring cross-eyed to get his point:

      The character was raped;
      The community had no power to change the situation
      The wizards didn't care, but one did
      The World was never the same afterwards

  11. Real Cause:Virtual Effect :: Virtual Cause:Real by leoaugust · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think one of the most interesting things to me in the games, esp. set in virtual worlds is the relationship of cause and effect.

    In real life, we get to "learn" some cause-effects, and use them in making future decisions. But, I personally believe, that there are no hard and fast cause-effects that do not alter when the frame of the system in question is either reduced or enlarged.

    I play the games so that I can understand the cause-effect equation. I can sometimes try something in the virtual world and see a real world physical or psychological effect. At other times I can try something in the real-world and see its effect in the virtual world.

    The round trip i.e. real-virtual-real is very much possible and observable by me. But the other round trip i.e. virtual-real-virtual is not possible for me, and the only way that I can imagine that is to consider it to be loosely a "mirror" form of the real-virtual-real string.

    These cause and effect in the real-virtual-real and virtual-real-virtual strings, and how they in some way help me make sense of my body-mind duality is why the virtual worlds are very real for me .... That is why I am drawn to these "virtual" worlds that very "real" for me ...

    --
    To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies ...
    1. Re:Real Cause:Virtual Effect :: Virtual Cause:Real by notque · · Score: 1

      That is why I am drawn to these "virtual" worlds that very "real" for me ...

      The only reason I'm drawn to these games is that a real world to me would involve staring into the corner of my cubicle for 8 hours.

      I don't often shoot laser beams at faries in my day to day life.

      --
      http://use.perl.org
    2. Re:Real Cause:Virtual Effect :: Virtual Cause:Real by Golantig · · Score: 1

      "my body-mind duality" - the mind is not seperate from the body, it is part of it. You have a body monality.

  12. And remember ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 2, Funny

    We thank you for your support.

  13. MUDs in the mainstream by true_tavish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't be fooled by the MMO description, EQ, UO and their ilk are still MUDs. Adding pretty pictures to a concept does not change what it is.

    1. Re:MUDs in the mainstream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Exactly.

      Look at EverQuest's socials sometime. Spend a few minutes going through them. Then look in interp.c from the Merc codebase.

      See anything amusing?

      I also like the 'new' features that all these graphical games are introducing as being innovative. Housing? Had it two decades ago. Horses? Been there, done that. Player vs. player? Please.

      The only real advantage of this generation of muds are a) graphics, and b) the fact that not just any 12 year old kid can download a codebase, slap on ANSI color and call it 'fully customized'.

      Thus, there's a much lower signal-to-noise ratio when one attempts to find something to play. And thankfully, the commercial enterprises seem to be going for diversity - Everquest is vastly different than Dark Age of Camelot, and they're both quite different from, say, Anarchy Online.

  14. Virtual worlds for spacecraft and underwater by goatbar · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I was pleasantly surprised when I went to slashdot this morning and found this article. I just spent the morning teaching some people how to use OpenInventor to visualize some Martian datasets for the upcoming MER missions.

    I've been writing some lecture notes for a class on designing virtual worlds that illustrate the real world (usually under water here) and have not discussed with those in the class the how, why, and philosophy of designing virtual worlds.

    thanks for the review!

  15. What? by Tei · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I am sorry I havent not learned english. He!.. In my country (spain) whas french the lang people have to know. How odly!

    Anyways here you can read my text with 0% english errors.

    I am fun.

    --

    -Woof woof woof!

  16. Insightful? by lauterm · · Score: 1

    Wine coolers are insightful?

    1. Re:Insightful? by rifter · · Score: 1

      Wine coolers are insightful?

      Funny, insightful, yeah what the diff. You however are redundant, my friend :).

    2. Re:Insightful? by lauterm · · Score: 1

      There's another one of me?

    3. Re:Insightful? by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

      "Funny, insightful, yeah what the diff. "

      The diff is that you don't get karma for being funny.

      graspee

    4. Re:Insightful? by rifter · · Score: 1


      The diff is that you don't get karma for being funny.

      Ah, you do have a point. Now, in my opinion the original poster made an insightful joke (he noticed a pun on the name of the professor and a famous fictional character used to market wine coolers) so it was actually both, anyway. I was just trying to be funny myself, anyway.

  17. His Games by Huff · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just a small plug for one of the incarnations of his game MUD2 www.mudii.co.uk .Having also met Richard at a few mudmeets (where the players and wizzes all meet up in a pub and get very drunk :-)) not only is he clever with the text based games, he is also a funny chap.

    Huff

  18. A Few Dozen Virtual World Designers? by Nova+Express · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the reviewer needs to define just what the book's scope is, and just what "virtual worlds" consist of. The phrase "a few dozen people in the world currently make their living at virtual world design," makes me believe that he's only considering the chief designers at high-profile commercial MMORPGs, leaving out everyone who might design non-online gaming worlds, sub-designers, etc. Not to mention all those people creating things off in Hollywood. Not to mention pen-and-paper game designers. And not to mention my science fiction writing breathern, of which there are, at a minimum, some 200 or so making their living from designing "virtual worlds" consisting of words on a page...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  19. Online gaming: Practical and useful observations. by Rahga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From where I stand, I see two very distinct type of "gamers" these days.... Rather than get to the point, I'll regail you with a story.

    I've been playing video games of all sorts for plenty of years now, and I have no problem admitting that I am not hooked on Counter-Strike. I'm involved with a gaming center that hosts one of those servers, and it is regularly active. I don't love CS, but I don't consider myself a bad player either.... Most of the maps in rotation are simple deathmatch type maps, none of the maps from version 1.5.... Typically, I rank in the top 3 or 4 out of 20 players when I hop on once or twice a month, a stat that surprises me even now. However, being the "old school" gamer, I often switch to maps that aren't so usual... With the CS 1.5 maps or classic maps (vegas, 747, as_ maps), I completely blow everyone else out of the water. I wouldn't say that it's the "lag" of newer maps, nor the fact that most of these guys don't know the maps... Heck, I hardly know some of these maps, so much of this is just a raw skill competition.

    I honestly believe that well over 80%, maybe up to 90% of "regular" online gamers are in it primarily for the social contact and environment. I'm sure there's plenty of people (like me) who would rather play for other primary reasons, such as the andrenaline rush or competitive nature, and those factors influence the social gamers greatly, but nontheless.... The vast majority of gamers seem to enjoy or are addicted to the social aspects more than anything else, and learn how to "go through the motions" and base their gameplay on mastery of these motions, and complain when things are altered in the slightest, even to the benefit of gameplay.

    I would have been much more interested to hear from the author about his own firsthand experiences with the dynamics of balancing social and gameplay components.... How *DO* you improve a game that people are addicted to, when addicts tend to fight change of any sort? As for that entire article, it seemed too pseudo-intellectual, and I see no benefit of questioning where the lines are drawn between art, social matters, and gaming... After all, I could classify the results of a masterful promoter attracting masses to an art exhibition as art itself.

  20. Re:Online gaming: Practical and useful observation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So your Practical and useful observation is that you're super 1337 when it comes to counter-strike?

  21. Rebuttals to Column at Skotos by herderofcats · · Score: 5, Informative
    There are also some interesting rebuttals/conversaion by Richard Bartle responding to Dave Rickey's Engines of Creation column at Skotos in the Skotos Forums. In that, Richard says:
    The crux of Dave's objection (as I see it) is that I'm developing a "theory" of virtual worlds that is neither provable nor disprovable, therefore it's not a theory. Well strictly speaking, from a Science standpoint, all theories are not only provable but are actually proven; anything else is merely a falsehood or an hypothesis. Dave is therefore correct: it isn't a formal theory.

    However, I wasn't speaking from a Science standpoint, I was speaking from an Art standpoint. I was using the word "theory" in the same way that it's used in "Film Theory" or "Theory of Art". These aren't theories in the scientific sense, but they are in the Comparative Studies sense. The idea is that an individual wishing to understand a work of art subscribes to one or more individual theories (which may or may not be consistent with other theories - or indeed one another) and applies these to "read" the work of art. You choose the theory you subscribe to based on criteria such as its relevance to your interests, the compellingness of its derivation, the degree to which you are convinced by its conclusions, the similarity of its judgments to your own aesthetic sensibilities etc..

    There is a lot more there worth reading.

    Also, Richard Bartle is also doing a column at Skotos called Notes from the Dawn of Time.

    -- Herder of Cats

    1. Re:Rebuttals to Column at Skotos by ph43thon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Dr. Bartle is confused on the meaning of the word "theory".. He seems to be talking about a "theorem" which can be proven or demonstrated. A theory is merely tested numerous times and seems to hold. I had this argument before with an Earth Sciences friend about theory v. theorem. They're always used to talking about theories as if they really are true and proven. It's sort of embarrassing that Dr. Bartle is confused on this point in my opinion.

      Strangely, even though Bartle confuses theory in his rebuttal.. he did use the word appropriately in the first place.. and humorously enough it seems to be Mr. Rickey who was confused. In any case, theories in art and science are the same in essence since they have to do with accepted and observed "norms". It's just easier to have dueling theories in art since they mainly just describe ideas and not naturally occurring phenomena.

      dictionary.com seems to want to toss in an extra def of theory which means a set of theorems in mathematics.. I believe this to be a very particular exception to theory's common usage and meaning.

      e

    2. Re:Rebuttals to Column at Skotos by Animats · · Score: 2, Interesting
      • The crux of Dave's objection (as I see it) is that I'm developing a "theory" of virtual worlds that is neither provable nor disprovable, therefore it's not a theory. Well strictly speaking, from a Science standpoint, all theories are not only provable but are actually proven; anything else is merely a falsehood or an hypothesis. Dave is therefore correct: it isn't a formal theory.

      This is a classic debate (look up "Kuhn vs. Popper"), but he's not making a good case for either side.

      Real theories are falsifiable - they make predictions which, if not bourne out by experiment, invalidate the theory. Thus, they can be tested. Over time, with more experimental tests, theories become more solidly based. Further work can be based on real theories. The hard sciences progress that way. Engineering technology can be built from real theories, because they have reliable predictive power.

      "Art theories" (really, "schools"), or "paradigms" are more like fads or social trends. They have a limited life cycle. They form weak bases for further development and don't lead to engineering technology.

    3. Re:Rebuttals to Column at Skotos by sgtrock · · Score: 1
      My opinion is just one that comes from someone with an enthusiastic appreciation of art in all its forms but with no talent whatsoever of my own. I first really developed that appreciation for art when I took a two semester course in the history of art while filling the liberal arts portion of an EE degree. I found it by far the most fascinating part of my coursework. No wonder I never finished the degree, eh? The lack of a degree really hasn't held up my career, though. I've progressed from network designer and implementer to enterprise architect over the course of 15 or so years. I suppose it helps that my parents taught me that you never really stop going to school.

      Anyhow, take the following for what it's worth, the opinion of an outsider to this world, but one who loves it.

      "Art theories" (really, "schools"), or "paradigms" are more like fads or social trends. They have a limited life cycle. They form weak bases for further development and don't lead to engineering technology.


      I'm not so sure that this is completely true. Granted, you find lots of schools of thought (probably a better choice of words than theory in this context) rising and falling over the course of a few months or years. Most of these can be safely ignored for the lack of depth that they show. However, there are exceptions that prove the rule. In another sense, though, you really can't call these schools of thought. They are in the way of being part of a conversation between the practioners of art and the rest of society that has been going on since Ogg first started painting on cave walls and Mogg bitched about his choice of color and composition.

      One of the more obvious examples of this conversation shows up when you compare art from just prior to the outbreak of the Black Death plague in Europe in the 14th century through the Renaissance. When you view paintings from the century prior to this time period, there are several major changes in style that are happening simultaneously in several places on the continent. As the the plague reaches its peak and subsides, there is a very clear demarcation in style and subject matter. It's so obvious it's almost a break in continuity. The emotional pain and horror from the loss of all the lives of loved ones and strangers shows up clearly in every example that you can find. There's also a limitation in the forms of expression used and subject matter chosen. It's as if the artists were (maybe unconsciously) deliberately limiting what and how they would express themselves.

      As some emotional distance develops over the next century or so, you can see the artists' innate optimism and joy of life reasserting itself. The changes in style begin to evolve again. As you move forward through the Renaissance, you can see it over and over. Art becomes more secular in nature, more varied in its subject matter, and more experimental in the techniques used. By the end of the Renaissance.

      To bring this around to being on topic: I think you can see the same thing happening in the world of computer gaming. MUDs have gone from simple text based systems to the graphically rich formats that we see today. This has allowed for a much wider variety of subject matter and techniques. You can argue that they are still limited in scope and expression, but to a large degree those limits are a direct result of the medium. You still see the same conversation going on between the artists and the rest of society.

      What I'm trying to say is that when you evaluate a school of thought, you really need to back up a bit. Put it in context of the medium, its place in the history of the conversation, and its immediate impact on society. Only then can you determine whether or not it will leave a lasting impression on the world around it.
  22. A little history by kmahan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The University of Illinois PLATO system had "Multi-User Dungeon" type games before 1978. Just a reminder that lots of innovative things happened on PLATO that then got "reinvented" years later. Having a 512x512 plasma(AC) screen based terminal hooked up to a mainframe and being able to write interterminal games easily was a lot more fun than trying to use the "graphics" on a trs-80 or apple.

    --
    Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
    1. Re:A little history by jbmadsen · · Score: 2, Informative

      PLATO is mentioned in the book.

  23. That reminds me... by Talia+Starhawke · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't have cable TV and I don't have air conditioning. Since the Midwest has been hit by a massive heat wave the past few days, I've been spending a lot of time at a friends' house who does. She watches a lot of reality tv shows, which disturb me greatly. However, she has told me the difference of watching these and getting pulled into the drama they spawn, and watching these and laughing is how seriously the participants take themselves.

    Take Big Brother 4 for example, the participants acknowledge the show for what it is: a game. Therefore, they don't take it quite as seriously as The Amazing Race, which is also a game.

    Now, you probably all are wondering where I'm going with this. Games are still that, games. No matter which way you play them, or how seriously you take them, they are still games. And the beautiful thing about them is they are designed to provide entertainment. Whether you find watching them and being pulled into the drama entertaining, or laughing at them, or debating the philosophy behind the strategy, you are still being entertained, which is allowing the game to do what it was designed to do.

    --
    +5, Female ;)
    1. Re:That reminds me... by AltaMannen · · Score: 1

      Is your point that games are the same as any other artform then? or do you mean that there are things that are not entertaining and therefore important?

    2. Re:That reminds me... by Talia+Starhawke · · Score: 1
      Is your point that games are the same as any other artform then?

      That's exactly my point. Way to put it into a nutshell for me. :)

      --
      +5, Female ;)
  24. Re:Virtual Visits by ggambett · · Score: 1

    What's the problem with collision detection in a Quake3 BSP?

    --
    My website
  25. a related book people might want to check out.... by stinkfoot · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "Pause & Effect" by Mark Meadows. he was a pioneer in virtual worlds (remember VRML?) and went on to write a book on interactive narrative. a virtual world is just an empty stage if there's no story behind it...

    lots of good art history and how it relates to immersive worlds:

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0735 711712/

  26. blah by tonyt · · Score: 1

    When I wrote up my Engines of Creation column for August 12th with a focus on Dr. Richard Bartle's Designing Virtual Worlds, I had no idea it was the closest thing to an independent review the book had yet received and that i would be able to use slashdot to get people to read it.

    --
    -=tonyt=-
  27. Re:Online gaming: Practical and useful observation by Rahga · · Score: 1

    Honestly, I meant for it to be " gamers seem to be far more 'socializers' than 'gamers' ", but yeah, it did kinda come out that way. I'm not "l33t", but what is somewhat scary to me is the preponderance of gamers who simply go through motions, and how it is evidenced in the slightest change to gameplay....

    Excuse me for using my peronsal experience as an example. I should have used someone else's point-of-view instead ;) .

  28. The social factor is a BIG by Archfeld · · Score: 2, Informative

    motivator for more than half of our very large clan as well. It can be seen by the number of people just chatting, I also see a corelation between age, the younger are generally more driven and competitive, while the older are generally more relaxed and there for the social aspect. This does not always hold true of course but I've been playing online games for a long time in many formats and that's what I've seen.
    Also I reallt think in games like EQ, people underestimate the number of women playing and just NOT telling anyone they are female. After a long term association with several guild members I was able to pick out numerous closet women playing male characters and actively trying to hide there sex.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  29. a pvp question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I am curious about Dave Rickey's comment in his old article (Engines of Creation #6) where he mentions the connection between increased territory directly corresponding to increased pvp population. His proof lies in the introduction of a new expansion to EQ that increased the territory on the Zek server (pvp server).
    The pvp server population increased after the expansion was released, so he assumes that the two are directly related to each other. My qualm is that it is has been my experience that expansion packs increase the general population anyway, so how can you say that increased territory, not the popularity of expansion packs, increased the pvp population. Would the pvp have increased anyway even if the expansion didn't include a territory increase?

  30. Re:a related book people might want to check out.. by Kwil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not necessarily. More accurate to say that it's a stage without actors. You could still have a setting, or even multiple settings, props, etc.

    And in fact, that's how you want it -- because ideally your players are your actors, and the stories are those that they make up themselves.

    The ideal experience for a game company is to set up a stage so compelling that actors flock to it to tell their own stories, thus lessening the work on you.

    --

    That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

  31. Try to have an opinion by lordpixel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, is it *all* of them or *most* of them? If its *most* of them then there must be some that are worthy of the term "virtual world" and thus something to write about. If its none of them, then why not say so...

    In any case a virtual world (The Matrix if you will) is hardly going to spring into being fully formed. There have to be steps to get there. Hopefully this book is about what steps have been tried.

    What MMOGs have you tried, and what would you do differently?

    --

    Lord Pixel - The cat who walks through walls
    A little bigger on the inside than out

  32. It's not Mystical - it's Social by Razor+Blades+are+Not · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You miss the point.
    The game is the background for social interactions between real people. Without that there would be nothing much to wax philosophical about.
    the book is about making these kinds of games more fun/successful. In single-player games the experience is entirely about the one person playing it. Some of the same principles still apply, but it is the added dimension of social interaction which distinguishes MMOGs from regular games.

    And guess what - when you get a bunch of people together you have to be able to satisfy as many of them at the same time as you can.

    That's what MMOG designers need to learn, and that's what this book is mostly about.

    1. Re:It's not Mystical - it's Social by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

      "And guess what - when you get a bunch of people together you have to be able to satisfy as many of them at the same time as you can."

      You are so the sort of person I'm inviting to my next orgy...

      graspee

  33. ....Lives with his mother by milktoastman · · Score: 1

    The inventor of the MUD? Well then, I bet that last line then continues "...with his mother."

  34. Try to be friendlier by kneecarrot · · Score: 1

    I've never played any MMOGs. Not a single one. You called my bluff. What do you think about that?

    --

    I always save my last mod point to mod up a good troll. You people are too serious.

  35. Re:$5 cheaper and FREE shipping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, he's a slut

  36. Sour grapes, much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "the dilettantes and dabblers who make up most of academia in the Arts"

    I was going to make some pithy comment, but this quote pretty much speaks for itself.

  37. Re:I THOUGHT WE WERE BOYCOTTING AMAZON? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sell out? Where do I sign!?

  38. Sounds like by phorm · · Score: 1

    This would be done by CGI (not a big deal anyhow), but is there an actual apache setting for this. I've often considered setting up something that would simply temporarily down the webserver in the event that it consumes a large amount of bandwidth of a specified small amount of time (say, a gig in under an hour) - or to as you said ignore a referer, if there is a lot of bandwidth hits coming from said referer (e.g. 100 hits and 200kb coming from slashdot starts to ignore slashdot).

  39. Chill dude. If you can bluff, I can call :) by lordpixel · · Score: 1

    Well, I think its sad anyone can get to +3 insightful without trying.

    Can't say I'm surprised though.

    Actually, yes I am, I'm surprised you didn't get to +5...

    --

    Lord Pixel - The cat who walks through walls
    A little bigger on the inside than out

  40. Not in the least by wurp · · Score: 1

    In a shared game world, you have the ability to give players the ability to do almost anything they can imagine. There are only two problems with this: you have to give them a hook that makes them feel it's meaningful to do something, and (worse) they have to live in a world in which _everyone else_ can do anything you let them do.

    Regarding the first problem - in the real world, why aren't you out living adventures? What makes it an exciting notion to think that someone would have adventures? It's the risk - the notion of putting it all on the line for some reward. Most people are unwilling to put it all on the line, probably because the people who were willing to tended to die before they bred. In the game, the most common way to give meaning to activities to give them an element of risk. Of course, you have to balance that against the things that keep people from having adventures in real life - if you do things that have real risk, eventually you lose whatever you were risking.

    The second problem is the bigger one. Some people decide that they don't care about whatever it is that they are risking, they care about affecting other people, usually for the worse. Griefers will log in with a character and needle other people into doing things that get their character killed, or worse.

    Anyway, my point is that picking what works in a virtual world is only related to how things work in the real world (or in books) in that one can inspire the other. The real world defines what we think is believable, and what we think is interesting. Books distill what we think is interesting. If you don't consider those things in the context of a massively multiplayer game, though, you're going to build a game that sucks.

  41. we've already been here by MegaFur · · Score: 1

    *sigh* You are obviously new here. This has already been debated. (a lot!)

    Of course most of these refer to "deep linking" which is an extra "evil" version of linking. But since you're against any large entity linking to your page you are probably against them "deep linking" to your page as well. This page (note this link comes from the "has" article) lists a number of sites that don't want anyone to link to them or have linking policies that heavily restrict how they can be linked to. At least in theory.

    And while you might (note I say might) have a point about how it's a terrible thing that all someone has to do is post a link to a site on slashdot and have it, thereby, slashdotted. But how do you really intend to prevent it?

    After all, a link is really just a string of text. E.g. H-T-T-P-COLON-SLASH-SLASH-W-W-W-DOT-P-H-O-R-M-I-X- DOT-C-O-M

    --
    Furry cows moo and decompress.
    1. Re:we've already been here by phorm · · Score: 1

      No, I don't really have anything against linking to my site. I don't yet have anything on there that should be of interest to a major site. However, if I did, I'd probably label it as "please email me before linking", so that I could at least make sure my countermeasures were happily in place and install some type of apache throttling/etc. Right now I prefer not to throttle, and don't have a need for it: just hoping for the courtesy of being informed before such a need emerges (in other words, link away, but if I've asked you not to flood my server without warning, please let me know ahead of time).

  42. A book I've actually held in my hand! by chiph · · Score: 1

    I picked up this book at the local chain bookstore, and I guess I was expecting a book from a programmer's viewpoint, you know, "define an area where your players dwell with this virtual class that overrides...". The contents seemed a bit "soft" to me, but now that I know that the author comes from the liberal-arts side of academia, I guess that's understandable.

    I think I'll go back and give it another peek (if it's still on the shelf when I get there - the last time there was a reviewed book on /., the shelves had been cleared of all copies that afternoon). I'm still interested in the topic, and while I'm not really a game player, I've always thought MUDS and MOOs were cool.

    I'll leave my bitching about the cost of books for another post...

    Chip H.

    1. Re:A book I've actually held in my hand! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, me here again, and as promised here is another post in which I bitch about the cost of books.

      OMG aren't books expensive! I really can't afford all the ones I want! It's so unfair!

      Thank you for reading

      Chip H.

    2. Re:A book I've actually held in my hand! by will_die · · Score: 1

      Grab a copy of "developing online games: an insider view" it was review by slashdot a while ago.
      More from a technical standpoint, but does not get into code. Interesting if you are into playing MMORPGs.

  43. Planetscape wasn't fun. by Saeger · · Score: 1
    I had high hopes for Planetscape, but after just finishing off-and-on play through three 7-day trials(*), the effect of the grand scale of the game wore off, the dozen-or-so vehicles lost the wow-factor, and the "battle rank" advancement to get more implants and skill certifications wasn't even that rewarding (i.e. addictive).

    I admit that some of the combat was massively intense (as in 5 frames-per-second intense on a fast rig), but the periods of inaction and travel time between hotspots got boring; the game started to feel like a job of retaking the same boring continent over and over. The game's backstory for the three factions didn't make the conflict any more interesting.

    IMO, a game needs to allow for a high degree of emergence so it can take on a life of its own. Plant some simple rules and allow the players to create the complexity they want from the bottom-up. (Yeah, easier said than done). I guess this is why I love games like SimCity...


    (*) To play through more than one trial period you just have to create a bogus GameSpy account for each new unique trialcode.

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  44. Let them have it. :) by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1

    Yes, it is an evolution of MUDs. But most (if not all) new game types evolve from the games before them. Adding 3D and making it a commercial success took some talent, enough to let them have a new acronym. ;)

    --
    Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
    1. Re:Let them have it. :) by Hedron · · Score: 1

      The real issue here is that adding a graphic element to the game allows for a use of spatial relationships in PVP that is much weaker in a text-based system. It's not only a pretty picture, it's a delivery method for complex information and a granular coordinate system that allows much greater complexity in combat. Sadly, the importance of these spatial relationship is underapreciated and the ability is massively under-used in most combat systems that are out there today. PIGs or MMORPGS as they're called, just haven't grasped this. Interestingly, a game like Planetside has a much better grip on the potential of subtle range differentiators. There are, however, some major differences in game style between a massively multi-player FPS and an MMORPG/PIG. Given those differences, Planetside's approach to utilizing spatial relationships wouldn't map directly to an MMORPG, but it does point in much more of the right direction than MMORPGs currently do. Hed

  45. My personal review by aralin · · Score: 1

    I went to Amazon to 'Look inside' the book and I am definitely buying. I was working on a game that could be characterized in that 'virtual worlds' field for some 5 years and this book covers many of the problems I have been thinking about for last few years.

    --
    If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
  46. Re:$5 cheaper and FREE shipping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how is this offtopic?

    it's +5, informative

    even if it supports amazon, you people need to grow up

  47. Re:$5 cheaper and FREE shipping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    damn straight.

  48. back on those good old days.... by mbennis · · Score: 0

    in 1997 when they told me that VRML is the future and i began to develop VRML worlds.
    And now in 2003, VRML where are you ? hou hou ?....