January 2009

• [Design] on the game mechanics of open questing Siege)
• • RANT: The Future of Quests Mike Rozak
  • • RANT: The Future of Quests Amanda Walker
    • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] cruise
      • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Amanda Walker
        • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Mike Sellers
        • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] John Buehler
        • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] cruise
          • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] John Buehler
          • Wikia MUD project Raph Koster
          • • Wikia MUD project Nabil Maynard
            • • Wikia MUD project Raph Koster
            • Wikia MUD project Peter Harkins
        • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Mike Oxford
        • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] cruise
            On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Mike Oxford wrote:
            > It really is an addiction; an addiction to chemicals made by our brains
            > and those hits don't come from long drawn-out quest chains, but by the
            > accomplishment at the end. Thus, the more "accomplishments" you do (the
            > more times you press the red lever in the cage) the more good feelings
            > you get from the food that drops out of the quest giver's dispenser.
            
            For some, yes, it is strong enough to rival a chemical addiction, but for
            most that hook degrades over time. I think the word I should have
            originally used is "unfulfilling" - chocolate is "fun", but (with
            aforementioned caveat) isn't really something you can base your life
            around.
            
            Humans require something...bigger, be it religion, relationships,
            philosophy, whatever, and it's that scale of fulfillment I want to aim
            for.
            
            Too far? I don't see why it should be - books, films and music all manage
            it. We are getting better - Mass Effect, for example, comes close with
            some of the decisions you have to make - but we have a way to go yet.
            Unfortunately, the players demands (and buying habits) are often in
            opposition with achieving that goal.
          • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Damion Schubert
            • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Threshold
              • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] John Buehler
              • • Players are shallow [was: The Future of Quests] Mike Sellers
    • RANT: The Future of Quests Mike Sellers
    • • RANT: The Future of Quests Damion Schubert
      • • RANT: The Future of Quests Mike Rozak
• [DESIGN] How big is enough? Ian Hess
• • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Mike Rozak
  • • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Mike Oxford
    • • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Vincent Archer
      • • [DESIGN] How big is enough? szii@sziisoft.com
  • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Siege)
  • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Threshold
  • [DESIGN] How big is enough? David Johansson
  • [DESIGN] How big is enough? Roger Durañona Vargas
• Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Tiago
• • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Jon Mayo
  • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Jeffrey Kesselman
  • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Chris White
  • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Mike Oxford
  • • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Tiago
    • • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Jeffrey Kesselman
      • • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Mike Oxford
        • • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Tiago
        • Persisting a MUD state with plain binary serialization Tiago.matias@gmail.com
• [DESIGN] Clojure? Matt Cruikshank
• • [DESIGN] Clojure? Richard Tew
  • • [DESIGN] Clojure? Matt Cruikshank