ID:154581
 
For those that don't know, I've been developing a MUD based on some of the best things I've experienced in other MUDs with my own thoughts and ideas.

One of the bricks upon which I'm building is that it will be a small community (no more than 250 people) who are fairly mature and more apt to socialize or play around than anything else. Killing spree's are the sort of thing this group doesn't like and do not partake in.

Now for the question... Do I make it invitation only and restrict the game to those who get an invitation to play (invitation could be given out by other players perhaps, not just the staff) or do I leave it open to whomever wants to come by and play and hope that they share or join the community? I could put a welcome message for new people explaining that it's not a PvP MUD and that there are better places to go, etc.

One of the things I'm realizing due to a current thread on the MUD-Dev list is that I think in "libertarian" ways where personal responsibility rules first, and in many ways I expect other people to behave in certain ways that, as has been shown over and over again, they may not do.

So, do I leave it open for anyone to play and hope I don't get the wrong people crashing my great environment, or do I start off restricting it from the beginning?
On 2/13/01 11:15 am Gabriel wrote:
So, do I leave it open for anyone to play and hope I don't get the wrong people crashing my great environment, or do I start off restricting it from the beginning?

I've thought about this too, and right now I intend to start off Cerulea (if it ever reaches playability) so that players will have to apply for accounts with the game before they can play. The application process probably won't be very tough at all, and maybe I'll never turn down anybody; it's the existence of the thing I'm hoping will weed out most undesirables.

Now, it's possible that a player willing to wait a couple days to play isn't of a higher caliber than one who wants instant action. But I do think it increases the likelihood that the player will understand what the game's about by the time they get to play.

There are some well-regarded MUDs out there that do this. And if I'm not getting as many players as I want, I can always take away the application process.

Z
In response to Zilal (#1)
On 2/13/01 11:36 am Zilal wrote:
I've thought about this too, and right now I intend to start off Cerulea (if it ever reaches playability) so that players will have to apply for accounts with the game before they can play. The application process probably won't be very tough at all, and maybe I'll never turn down anybody; it's the existence of the thing I'm hoping will weed out most undesirables.

For the kind of small community game Gabriel wants to do (which is about the same as I'd want to do with a MUD), I totally advocate applications and primarily going by invitation only.

Also, you might want to require email verification to a non-free email address, so that it's easier to ban problem players and such.

Much better to start with 5 friends and build up from there, I'd think.
In response to Deadron (#2)
On 2/13/01 11:40 am Deadron wrote:
For the kind of small community game Gabriel wants to do
(which is about the same as I'd want to do with a MUD), I
totally advocate applications and primarily going by
invitation only.

Also, you might want to require email verification to a
non-free email address, so that it's easier to ban
problem players and such.

Much better to start with 5 friends and build up from
there, I'd think.

This actually reminds me - is Dantom still intending to allow us our own versions of key creators? This would be another way we could restrict games by applications. Just curious :).

I don't think it's nessisary for what I'm doing, but since I'll be releasing the source it may be something someone else would like to do and including whatever libraries are needed for some auto type features would be nice to do.
In response to Gabriel (#3)
Also, you might want to require email verification to a
non-free email address, so that it's easier to ban
problem players and such.



This actually reminds me - is Dantom still intending to allow us our own versions of key creators? This would be another way we could restrict games by applications. Just curious :).

There is an unadvertised feature of the key system that may be relevant to your question. It is possible to create a totally separate key "domain". Keys created in this domain would be entirely independent of other domains--they only have to be unique within their own domain.

I haven't made an interface for you to register new domains, but the intention was for situations such as this where you want more control over the application process.

Of course, you can achieve the same thing by putting your game in the standard domain and just making people apply to get into your game. It depends how isolated you want to be from the rest of BYOND. (The hub, pagers, and everything are all independent in each domain.)

Another thought would be for various "purist" rpg groups to get together, form a common application process, and pool their users together. That way, a user who has been invited into the system could play a couple different games without having to apply separately for each one. Each admin would of course have the power to ban the user from their site and also to submit a request to the organization to ban the user altogether. It would be a sort of RPG passport.

--Dan