Game Fun

This weeks readings where all centred around and about the word "Fun".  Fun is just another word for learning we have an idea of what fun is but not why things are fun. These readings are going to guide us into the meaning behind the word "fun".

Clubs diamonds hearts and spades: Players who suit MUD's

The article explains how there are 4 approaches to playing MUD's. The approaches arise from inter-relationship of two-dimensions vs playing style, action vs interaction and world-orientation vs player orientated. These explain the labelling of MUD's being "Social" or "Game like"

MUD's link back to 1978 Trubshaws game MUD's can still be of great value in non game. The thrust of this paper emphasises those factors that should be kept in mind when trying to create a good MUD whatever the application it's only the terminology of "fun" MUDs, not the subject matter. Even those MUDs built from the ground up are still treated by users as if they were games.

Four things people enjoyed personally about MUD's
-Achievement within the game context
-Exploration of the game
-Socialising with others
-Imposition upon others

Looking into each player type in more detail 
Achievers regard points-gathering and rising in levels as their main goal.  Explorers delight in having the game expose its internal machinations to them.Socialisers are interested in people, and what they have to say.  Killers get their kicks from imposing themselves on others.
How many players typically fall within each area depends on the MUD. If too many gravitate to one particular style, the effect can be to cause players of other persuasions to leave,  can feed back and reduce the numbers in the first category. Making sure that a game doesn't go off in the wrong direction and lose players can be difficult.
Achievers are interested in doing things to the game. Achievers are proud of their formal status in the game's built-in level hierarchy, and of how short a time they took to reach it. Explorers are interested in having the game surprise them. Explorers are proud of their knowledge of the game's finer points, especially if new players treat them as founts of all knowledge. Socialisers are interested in interacting with other players. Socialisers are proud of their friendships, their contacts and their influence. Killers are interested in doing things to people. Killers are proud of their reputation and of their oft-practiced fighting skills.

Changing the player type balance
A stable MUD is one in which the four principal styles of player are in equilibrium. This means that over time players for each style remains constant, so that the balance between the the various types remains the same. 

Players
Putting emphasis on players rather than the game is easy, just give the system with lots of communication commands and little else. The more the scales are tipped towards players, though, the less of a MUD you have and the more of a CB-style chatline. Beyond a certain point, the game can't provide a context for communication,  it ceases to be a viable virtual world and no longer have a MUD.
Worls 
Make it so big and awkward that no-one ever meets anyone in it, you can ensure that if they do meet up, then there are very few ways in which they an interact. 
Interacting
Putting the emphasis on interaction rather than action can go a long way. Restricting the freedom of players to choose different courses of action is the mechanism for implementing it, so they can only follow a narrow or predetermined development path. It's MUD-as-theatre


Player Interactions
Achievers vs Achievers: Achievers regard other achievers as competition to be beaten
Achievers vs Explorers: Achievers tend to regard explorers as losers
Achievers vs Socialisers: The achievers don't want to lose the argument, and the socialisers don't want to stop talking.
Achievers vs Killers: Achievers don't particularly like killers, Increasing the number of killers will reduce the number of achievers.
Explorers vs Achievers:Explorers look on achievers as nascent explorers.
Explorers vs Explorers: Explorers hold good explorers in great respect.
Explorers vs Socialisers: Explorers consider socialisers to be people they can impress.
Explorers vs Killers: Explorers often have a grudging respect for killers.
Socialisers vs Achievers: Socialisers like achievers they provide the running drama which the socialisers can converse.
Socialisers vs Explorers: Socialisers consider explorers to be sad characters who need a life.
Socialisers vs Socialisers: Socialisers can talk to one another on any subject for hours on end, and come back later for more.
Socialisers vs Killers: The hatred that some socialisers bear for killers admits no bounds
The reading goes on to talk about more different types of player interactions.

This article helped give me a better understanding of MUD's as I hadn't had any extensive knowledge before now.
Article

The second article was MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research by Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc and Robert Zubec. This was an article I had read before and was happy to revisit as it was really insightful. Its about the Mechanics, Dynamics and Aesthetics framework. In The article explains everything about MDA and how each part plays a significant role in understanding games. MDA helps to better the experience of gaming as a whole and will then impact people to better their designs and research thats involved in every game out there at the moment.
Article

Another Article I found helpful
MUD history

Image info