ID:136460
 Oct 9 2002, 9:16 am
|
|
How about making a channel specifically for MUDs? They're beginning to become quite popular, and aren't really traditional RPGs. I think you should make a Byond.MUD or something :)
| |
|
Oct 9 2002, 10:23 am
|
|
Foomer
 |
I don't think they're quite popular, since I haven't seen any yet. Besides, most MUDs fit perfectly well into the RPG category.
|
Ghaleon wrote:
How about making a channel specifically for MUDs? They're beginning to become quite popular, and aren't really traditional RPGs. I think you should make a Byond.MUD or something :) I can think of exactly one MUD that I've seen (Dan's Night Soil demo or whatnot), three that I know of in development but have never seen test versions of firsthand, and approximately eight point two billion text games that happily label themselves MUD while having absolutely nothing to do with the term past their nongraphical nature. Granted, MUD is a pretty hazy term in and of itself, but there's a pretty sizeable chunk of gamingdom carved out around a few closely related standards. I could be missing something here--I don't claim to be an expert authority on MUDs--but it also bears mentioning that if the other two major multiplayer gameplay-based categorizations are such massively broad groupings as "Party games" and "Strategy games" (I'm starting to miss the "Brain Games" title; it was a much more useful distinction against BYOND.Party), MUDs definitely do not constitute a large enough grouping to warrant their own channel. | |
I have my games BYONDHockey and BYONDBasketball which are pretty fun and there are others out there. I plan to make a few more. I think a Sports channel should at least be in the plans for the future, not exactly now since there aren't very many, but soon. They're picking up. Thanks.
Canar | |
I've never been quite sure what the definition of a sport is. I've seen people argue about what is and isn't a sport and neither side tends to have anything other than an opinion. As far as I can tell, sport == game. That doesn't help provide a specific category.
I still like Action. If a major factor is moving around and testing the reflexes of players, it's an action game. Easy definition. Plenty of content. | |
Well, I'll admit that mine's nothing more than an opinion either, but my definition of a sport is a game that could be played in the real world (or foreseeable future of this world), provided all of the necessary accessories were available, involves competition between two or more sides, and has a result that allows any of the objects (most especially the players) within the game to be reused without any intentional damage beyond tolerance. The only exceptions are skeet shooting, sport hunting, and the like, which do qualify as sports -- however, in their cases, the game doesn't involve any intentional harm to the players themselves. Computer facsimiles befuddle this definition somewhat, but in such a circumstance, "players" in that sense becomes their computer facsimiles (i.e. computer representations of players are not intentionally harmed beyond tolerances). By "tolerances", I mean physical limits before serious injury results. Rugby and boxing, for example, involve plenty of intentional harm, but none of the harm is intentionally done in an effort to cause permanent damage or death. For example, bashing someone on the side of the head will hurt, but it will heal -- hacking someone with a sword instantly takes it away from a sport (and probably out of the "game" category altogether, unless it is done to a computer facsimile).
In short, a sport is a game, but a game is not a sport. In mathematical terms, "sport" is an element of "game". ;-) You can play soccer in real life with 18 people, a field, and a soccer ball, and all of the components can be reused, with a little maintenance. However, you'd be hard-pressed to make a game in real life with magical spells and potions and stuff like that, as well as monsters to slay. Same goes for a Quake Deathmatch -- that is definitely not a sport, due to the fact that it's not possible (or at least sane) to run around blowing people up with a rocket launcher. | |
I've said before that I'm not crazy about the name of the "Party" category, so how about splitting it into two categories, "Action" and "Multiplayer Mash" or something?
Z | |
I'd just stick with the basics.
For BYOND, we'd have Role-playing, Action, Puzzle, Single-player, Chat and Utility. (Maybe Strategy instead of Puzzle. Chess, Checkers, and Echelon are still strategy games.) The more I think about it, the more I decide that "Fan Games" is a stupid category. To be quite frank, Dragon Warrior Online is an RPG, and it should be classified as an RPG, regardless of what it is based on. Having a Fan Games category just makes it look as through BYOND is supporting fan games, rather than being innocently taken advantage of and flooded by them. I think if they'd just tighten up the requirements for a game to make it onto the Game Listing, then it'd clean things up quite a bit. I'd really like to see a listing of games that are actually as professional as BYOND games can get at the moment. Someone of the ones on the Game Listing are pretty half-baked, sloppy, and just make you think, "The guys who reviewed this must be really over-worked." Anyway, sports games and of course, RacingGame would fit quite well into the action category. Scream of the Stickster would fit there too! And the game that I thought up last night and think is a brilliant meshed ripoff of Metroid and Zelda (Zeldroid! No, actually I'm calling it Starlink.) would also make an excellent Action game. Chat and Utility could possibly be merged, so we could have a Puzzle and a Strategy section. Hmmm... Anyway, contribute thoughts if you will, my mind is getting lost on other odd ideas... | |
Foomer wrote:
I'd just stick with the basics. Of course, most of the DBZ games would be classed by their creators as RPGs, so we'd still be stuck. I think if they'd just tighten up the requirements for a game to make it onto the Game Listing, then it'd clean things up quite a bit. I'd really like to see a listing of games that are actually as professional as BYOND games can get at the moment. Someone of the ones on the Game Listing are pretty half-baked, sloppy, and just make you think, "The guys who reviewed this must be really over-worked." That sounds addictive. I'd definitely play. Scream of the Stickster would indeed count as an action game; right now I've submitted it to BYOND.Party, because it's at heart intended for party play. (It plays best with large crowds.) Chat and Utility could possibly be merged, so we could have a Puzzle and a Strategy section. Hmmm... Anyway, contribute thoughts if you will, my mind is getting lost on other odd ideas... Well, the number of chats seems to be climbing quite fast, so I'd hold off on that just yet. Lummox JR | |
Of course, most of the DBZ games would be classed by their creators as RPGs, so we'd still be stuck. I'd follow a simple rule. If the game sucks (as most DBZ games do), don't put it on the listing. | |
And the game that I thought up last night and think is a brilliant meshed ripoff of Metroid and Zelda (Zeldroid! No, actually I'm calling it Starlink.) would also make an excellent Action game.
That sounds addictive. I'd definitely play. Of course, being me, I can't work on anything for more than two days, and I started it two days ago. | |
grrr, everyone gets that wrong, a mud is not a text based game. a mud is like nightmud(made by dan or tom or both) It has nothing to do with text nessesarly, and almost or even can have a map. Text based games(TBG for short) is all text. With a narrarator and what not. Now get it right. it would be best for like BYOND.tbg or BYOND.textbasedgames(kinda long).
| |
Foomer wrote:
I think if they'd just tighten up the requirements for a game to make it onto the Game Listing, then it'd clean things up quite a bit. I'd really like to see a listing of games that are actually as professional as BYOND games can get at the moment. Someone of the ones on the Game Listing are pretty half-baked, sloppy, and just make you think, "The guys who reviewed this must be really over-worked." The guys who reviewed this are trying to be as open-minded as possible while upping the overall quality of BYOND games. Many many many games are rejected/returned for resubmission (vastly more than are accepted) -- we gotta accept something sometime, and some games won't develop further if the developer doesn't get some encouragement. As the overall quality of game submissions goes up, the requirements go up. In addition, the guys who reviewed this have proposed a new system that will allow us to be both inclusive and elitist at the same time, which Dan is currently in the process of implementing. Finally, after the next release, the guys who reviewed this will re-review all games on the hub and reset those that don't meet certain increased standards. | |
For sake of reminding you,
PUZZLE GAMES ARE NOT THE SAME AS STRATEGY GAMES! Puzzle games have a very different feel from strategy games. Puzzle games rely more on deep thought while strategy games rely more on coordination. Sure, it invloves less about reflexes and more about brain-work, but either we revert to the old Brain Games idea (which I dislike), or we add a separate category. Until then, the only reason that Slurpy is in Strategy is because it was in Brain Games and Brain Games was renamed. =P | |