Meridian 59

Nalates · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2014 12:13 am

Meridian 59 is an 18 year old MMOG. The new Yorker Magazine ran a story on it. See that here: THE LAST SURVIVORS OF MERIDIAN 59

This is a MMOG that even predates the Cavern. First released in September 1996. Myst was only 3 years ahead of it. Meridian 59 (M59) was/is an MMOG released 7 years before Uru: Ages Beyond Myst.

M59 holds the title as the first real-time 3D online role playing game. Now that is something. M59 had features later adopted by MMOG’s that came after. For instance in-game guilds with voting systems for selecting leaders. There were in game information systems called newsglobes. Something similar to what recent discussions here have been about… again.

There are no levels or the typical grinds to get abilities. For the first Swords and Sorcery MMORPG it is a surprisingly advanced game.

I bring this up because the U.M. study on player retention points to player interaction (person-to-person) as the most effective influence for player retention. The New Yorker quotes players remaining in M59 and still playing 18 years later. I think the quotes in the article bring the Teng & Adamic study to life.

While disagreeing with an idea is what free speech is about, the rational disagreement with a study based on reams of data and analysis explained in detail needs to be rebutted by more than a personal opinion. One needs to have studies or data to support their position and reasons for their thinking. Otherwise, a discussion is just a voicing of opinions that often devolves into a verbal squabble. It is how children argue, which is why things remain the same.

M59 is different than the Cavern. It is based on dueling, violence. But, the in game tension was based on real loss, die and it is seriously game over, build a new character and start over type serious. This drove a need for players to ban together for protection. There is that person-to-person interaction. It appealed to some and not others.

Much of the story of M59 is handed down player to player as an oral history. Of course there are forums and web sites that carry some of the history and story. Very much as is the case with Uru. Lots of similarities.

In 2000 the game was shut down by its commercial owner. Someone leaked the server code after the shutdown. Ever since there have been free to play servers running M59. The result of that release is M59 no longer run as a commercial game nor does it have any commercial support. There be lessons here…

A small core of developers is upgrading the game and planning to take it to Steam. That would be an interesting step.

Looking at the similarities in M59 and Uru we start to see the problems and the exceptional ideas. One can go down the list of criteria people think make a game popular. For instance many have liked Uru because it has no violence, well not as a key part of play. M59 is a player vs player combat game. Both need new content. Both have devolved to a small core of players. Both are dependent on a few developers to move the game forward.

There are things to be learned. For instance it is not the violence or lack of violence that makes the game similar or is better for player retention. There are different types of people that like the respective games, but that is not the reason both are in nearly the same shape.

The game industry has thousands of studies about what works in game play. How many of us read those resources?

No one puts everything into a game in the same way. But, in popular games we see mixes of the important things known to make games popular. The blend of aspects is what gives games their character. Different people like different games. But, Facebook and Zynga seem to have the basics worked out for mass appeal. They are trying for mass appeal, something that M59 and Uru have never really had.

So, with Uru it comes down to what can we change to improve mass appeal and player retention while keeping Uru as Uru? Those that have ideas they believe in are busy building their versions of the Cavern. Time will tell if they got it right.

We will see if they and we have learned anything or if we are just trial-and-error'ing our opinions.

Lord Chaos · **Joined:** Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:57 am **Posts:** 1337

Do we really want mass appeal? We do want enough appeal, so that the game is financially viable. I'm not sure that means going after everyone. It's an interesting balance; Myst wasn't really designed for mass appeal, but was more of an experiment that came along at the right time to capture and captivate many people.

What kind of experiment could be done today, with today's tech, that would captivate people the way Myst did? If you know the answer to that, a lot of people want to speak to you.

The Meridian 59 people have found a viable niche. Uru's niche is always on the edge of viability. Business through the ages has struggled with this kind of balance.

janaba1 · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2014 11:22 am

Lord Chaos wrote:

Do we really want mass appeal? We do want enough appeal, so that the game is financially viable. I'm not sure that means going after everyone. It's an interesting balance; Myst wasn't really designed for mass appeal, but was more of an experiment that came along at the right time to capture and captivate many people.
The Meridian 59 people have found a viable niche. Uru's niche is always on the edge of viability. Business through the ages has struggled with this kind of balance.

That is it exactly, LC, that is the 'paradox' I was hinting to on another topic lately, the fact that many not 'r e a l l y' want toooo many and all kinds of people in Uru and that many not 'r e a l l y' want toooo much change if at all, but if so 'o n l y' in a very special (old familiar Cyan style) way ... That is understandable from their point of view, so this is just fact (no blame, we're talking about facts here, right?), which kept and still keeps Uru constantly, as LC pointed out so perfectly, 'on the edge of viability' ...

It worked until now and might work further on with a considerable perpetual effort from the community base u n t i l ... That's why I'd say, be open as much as you can and enjoy everything while you still can ...

tommyap · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2014 1:00 pm

The problem (or indead several) with the studies Nalates is referring to is that they always ignore
that people ar not robots, their choices are not fixed, their behaviour therefore far less predictable
than researchers are willing to take into account.
Polls and interviews do not solve that problem at all because people do not answer/respond truthfully for a variety of reasons or refuse to take part in the survey.
What you are left with are statistics that can and will be interpeted in any way appealing to the researcher.
The statistics themselves may tell you something about the past, not the future. WHAT they
tell you is a question of interpretation only.
Projecting statistic data of this sort forward in time is not science but gambling.
Projecting statistic data from one game onto another is even more ridiculous. It would be of marginal
meaning if data was collected from a large number of very different games.
Personal opinions are just as meaningfull as Nalates "science" and not inferior in any way.
What appeals to you, the things that to your opinion will improve YOUR retention may improve MY retention.
You will never know without discussing it freely without Nalates "facts" keeping you from doing it.

On with the discussion.
I think this game has huge potential.
Having NPC actors playing out bits of storyline from time to time is briliant and relatively cheap. It
would have been even better if those occurrances had been recorded and availlable in game for anyone not present at the time to watch/experience at a later date.
A multilayered lake ecology project, with nice rewards when some threshhold is met, especially if the
individual projects are very time consuming, would keep me in the game for a very long time.
Large free range areas, that take a lot of time exploring in their entirety and offer resources of some
sort (that you actually need) would keep me buzy much longer than any puzzle would.
Solving an age makes that area basicly redundant from then on, unless you keep needing it for something or other.
One can argue that an exploration/puzzle game will likely only appeal to a small percentage of players.
Considering the size of humanity and the continually expanding acces to the internet, i would not worry
about it.
Fan made content can only go so far. A new age is great. It will improve retention for as long as it takes
the average player to explore/solve it. Not much.
The main problem is money and what to use it for.
Would Cyan be willing to produce content on a contract basis, something voted on and payed for by fans?
I have serious doubts about that, but than again, you never know unless you ask.
The fact that there is a core fanbase that keeps comming back for years and years shows that retention
is not as bad after all.

Lord Chaos · **Joined:** Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:57 am **Posts:** 1337

If you ever want to freeze a conversation solid, ask someone "What do you really want?" It's a question that very few people are equipped to answer, for various social and personal reasons. I know that I have a hard time with it, and need to sneak up on the answer.

Well, answers in general are shy, and want sneaking up on. That's a different story, but it does impinge upon games because both makers and players are chasing a nebulous concept in the dark with a small flashlight.

Studies purport to tell us what we want. They analyze the responses of large numbers of people, in hopes that some sort of truth will emerge. The truth can be illustrated by the long-time Uru principle of "people go where people are." It may not be what they way, but a person in the Nexus choosing a destination tends to choose one that already holds people.

But... the crowd may not be in pursuit of truth. An event may come up and be nothing. News organizations try to pump events up to generate sales, but this does nothing to develop a long-term outlook on what people's souls need and desire. Courage is required to walk any long-term path toward a goal that can only be approximated, and shareholders aren't known for their courage. People tend to want answers NOW! That leads to a lot of wrong answers.

Nalates · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2014 2:34 pm

@taommyap – I am amazed how far off point you are. The studies don’t presume anything about humans. They are research into what people do and possibly why. Read them then explain to me how they are ignoring/excluding any human aspects in their research or conclusions. Or where they have made assumptions.

Where did you come up with that idea they ignore human nature/behavior? Do you have any evidence they did that in any of the studies I quoted? Did you read them? Or just decide based on your opinion and biases they weren’t worth reading?

You are probably unaware of the studies and experiments proving humans are highly predictable. Robots programmed to catch falling objects perfectly replicate what appears to be human individual’s random behavior. Proctor & Gamble reliably predicts when and what you (collective you) will buy weeks in advance. Amazon is working on predictive shipping, they actually plan to ship items days before they are purchased.

I suppose from what you wrote you would like to think humans are unpredictable. But, we have almost 100 years of marketing data and social science that says otherwise. Even what we consider irrational behavior is predictable. (predictably irrational) What you or any individual may do at any given moment is difficult to predict with high certainly. But, many of the things you will do and when you will do them are predictable with a frame of hours or days.

Your first paragraph is contrary to most of what we know about humans. Employment Personality Assessments are used because they work. (Reference) They predict future behaviors. Police, military, and businesses use them because they work. Insurance companies require businesses in certain fields only hire people after personality assessments that show the required traits.

@Lord Chaos – What study is purporting to tell us what we want?

The studies I am seeing are about what people are doing and trying to figure out why they are doing it. You seem to have surveys confused with studies.

ChloeRhodes · **Joined:** Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:29 am **Posts:** 520

Nalates wrote:

While disagreeing with an idea is what free speech is about, the rational disagreement with a study based on reams of data and analysis explained in detail needs to be rebutted by more than a personal opinion. One needs to have studies or data to support their position and reasons for their thinking. Otherwise, a discussion is just a voicing of opinions that often devolves into a verbal squabble. It is how children argue, which is why things remain the same.

Nal, no one has disagreed here with your basic premise of player retention being a major factor for Uru. Nor has anyone disagreed with the idea of P v P being a component that helps with player retention and something that Uru can benefit from.

So, rather than parrot the same thing over and over again with different studies etc, when people are in agreement with you that "Yes this is an issue, that needs to be fixed> and are currently coming up with solutions to fix these underlying issues, why are you not presenting solutions to this issue yourself? You've posted time and time again various studies regarding a wide range of ways other MMO's have approached their player retention issues. You seem to keep trying to bring attention to a problem that everyone already sees is a problem rather than trying to find a solution that works for Uru. In other words we've all moved on from recognizing the issue, while you still seem to be stuck trying to convince us it is an issue. We know it's an issue. We get that.

Over the years we've presented a wide range of ways to fix Uru's player retention, many of which are outlined in the studies you've posted too, and ways that can be incorporated into Uru. Rather than address these ideas, and offer up various ways to change, modify, or add to these ideas yourself, you've seemed IMO to want to simply restart the discussion from scratch over and over again. I'm going to cross post my solutions from the locked thread, I ask that you look them over and address these three things point by point and tell me what you think of them as solutions to the player retention issue and why you think they will or will not work:

Quote:

1. User Interface Upgrades: Upgrade the UI to a modern era system. That means Chat channels for more groups, Improved menus, and better camera/movement controls.

2. Ease of Access: This is a glaring fault in Uru that very few MMO's have. It's the time frame in which a new player starts up Uru' executable, to when they first come across another player. The solution to this issue is moving the start up age from Relto, to a public area that veteran players can congregate in to meet new players just starting out, and where a person that is urged to play the game by a friend or family member can meet them within the game for the first time.

3. Repeatable Content:

This is broken up into two categories. Player Vs Player, and Player Vs Environment.

Player Vs Player: I'm not talking about Marker missions that provide no benefit to the player, or Pellet scores. I'm talking about Player Vs Player content that never gets old that people can do in groups. Gahreesen Wall. Kahlo races etc. Games that allow the players to compete against one another and track invididual/group progress on a scoreboard like device.

Player vs Enviornment:

This isn't ages like the prime ages or Ercana. These are ages in which you can play over and over again and enjoy them again and again. They have to have both a point to wanting to play them over and over again. IE a reward, and a game system that doesn't make the play feel redundant and tedious.

Lord Chaos · **Joined:** Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:57 am **Posts:** 1337

Nalates wrote:

The studies I am seeing are about what people are doing and trying to figure out why they are doing it. You seem to have surveys confused with studies.

There's some truth to that, but I'm not sure it matters. One way or another, people with products are trying to predict which product will produce the most productive bottom line. You could call that a measure of "player retention."

I wasn't all that clear in expressing my main point, which is that finding the reasons why people do anything is very difficult. It's fairly easy to predict what large groups of people will do (see Hari Seldon in Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" books), but there are always mules and other outliers. For good, or for bad. "Myst" was such an outlier; no focus group would have predicted that success, and it's a good thing the nascent Cyan organization was just going with what they loved.

My main point is that, somehow, we need to encourage people to think of new presentations. We also need to encourage other people to look into those new things. Second Life is an interesting case study, as I've done a number of events there and found that it's very hard to attract people to a new type of event from the established ones. People tend to do what's familiar, which affects the studies and surveys.

After all, if there are no alternatives, how can one say anything but "this is what I do?" If there are alternatives, how does one get the word out? Beta was a better video recording format but it didn't suit the public's desire to watch a whole movie, so VHS with its two-hour recording time won out... except in the pro market where performance mattered more than time.

Now, with a market holding so very many games and other ways to spend time, would even a revolutionary Myst analog even have a chance? I have no idea. The nature of the biological sport is that it can't be predicted.

tommyap · **Posted:** Wed May 14, 2014 8:51 pm

@Nalates

Nalates wrote:

@taommyap – I am amazed how far off point you are. The studies don’t presume anything about humans. They are research into what people do and possibly why. Read them then explain to me how they are ignoring/excluding any human aspects in their research or conclusions. Or where they have made assumptions.

[and possibly why]
Without knowing all variables on an individual level? Assumptions by definition.

Nalates wrote:

Where did you come up with that idea they ignore human nature/behavior? Do you have any evidence they did that in any of the studies I quoted? Did you read them? Or just decide based on your opinion and biases they weren’t worth reading?

I did at no point state that these studies are not worth reading.
Practicly every study in human behaviour i have read (and i am the first to admit that i tend to ignore
them completely) ignores the behaviour of the researchers themselves. As if they are not human ... DOH.
(which is the very reason i tend to ignore them in the first place)
I did in fact read NONE of the studies you quoted and likely never will. Does that prove your point.
Nope.
It is YOU who uses any study to scientify YOUR point.(in this case anyway)
You are comparing apples with pears without any real reference one way or the other.

Nalates wrote:

You are probably unaware of the studies and experiments proving humans are highly predictable. Robots programmed to catch falling objects perfectly replicate what appears to be human individual’s random behavior. Proctor & Gamble reliably predicts when and what you (collective you) will buy weeks in advance. Amazon is working on predictive shipping, they actually plan to ship items days before they are purchased.

Robots that do exactly what they are programmed to do, and "appearing" human like ... DOH again.
Can you buy something that is unavaillable?
Proctor & Gamble must make a lot of money delivering a pipedream.
I wish Amazon the best of luck.

Nalates wrote:

I suppose from what you wrote you would like to think humans are unpredictable. But, we have almost 100 years of marketing data and social science that says otherwise. Even what we consider irrational behavior is predictable. (predictably irrational) What you or any individual may do at any given moment is difficult to predict with high certainly. But, many of the things you will do and when you will do them are predictable with a frame of hours or days.

I repeat: Can you buy what is not availlable?
And yes, i can predict that you are likely to use the bathroom at least twice a day.
And most likely once before you go to bed.
Impressive huh.
It is so easy to convince people that human behaviour is predictable in practically every way that it is
almost laughable.

Nalates wrote:

Your first paragraph is contrary to most of what we know about humans. Employment Personality Assessments are used because they work. (Reference) They predict future behaviors. Police, military, and businesses use them because they work. Insurance companies require businesses in certain fields only hire people after personality assessments that show the required traits.

They are used because people in general do not like insecurities.
We prefer to have a handle on things.
We tend to believe what we want to believe and seak confirmation where ever we can find it.
(especially if you are prone to selfdilusion, which unfortunally many people are)
Very interesting from a marketing and political point of view.
Very profitable.
In other words. They are not used after it was proven they would work.
They are used because we desperately WANT them to work and are continuously telling ourselves they do once we have them without any real evidence we would do worse without them. Even worse, we tend to ignore all evidence (or even destroy it if we can) that proves that it actually does not work at all.
There is a market for that sort of thing and it is HUGE. Human studies can bring in a lot of hard cash,
directly and indirectly because we humans are so easy to manipulate.
Presenting questionable science (due to your interpretation, i am not judging the quality of the studies
you present) to make your point and trying to block (my interpretation) an interesting topic from further discussion at the same time, while you are in the proces of continuing that topic from another (closed) thread is very unpredictable behaviour in my book.(get the point?)
I would be far more interested to learn what thoughts you have on improving Moula than any thoughts you have on S.L.. My thoughts on S.L. are practically nonexistent and i prefer to keep it that way.
Besides, you have a blog/site/whatever for that sort of thing, keep it there.

@ChloeRhodes
1. usufull but low priority.
2. high priority, could perhaps be solved in other ways as well. Making all links to Ae'gura from yourney
ages link to public Ae'gura would be a compromise i would be comfortable with for instance.
3. high priority, collecting supplies and or materials in constant need would do the same.
Problem is, that something like that would likely neccessitate a complete overhaul of the
entire game.
I would like to add a number 4 for medium priority: easy to use tools for personalizing at least one area. As a compromise to modding.
I would like to add 5 for high priority: cleaning up loose ends from Uru offline even when that means retrofitting again to reduce confusion and pointless search for clues and or puzzles that are simply not there.
In order to improve retention the first priority should be to not frustrate/confuse people out.

ChloeRhodes · **Joined:** Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:29 am **Posts:** 520

tommyap wrote:

@ChloeRhodes
1. usufull but low priority.
2. high priority, could perhaps be solved in other ways as well. Making all links to Ae'gura from yourney
ages link to public Ae'gura would be a compromise i would be comfortable with for instance.
3. high priority, collecting supplies and or materials in constant need would do the same.
Problem is, that something like that would likely neccessitate a complete overhaul of the
entire game.
I would like to add a number 4 for medium priority: easy to use tools for personalizing at least one area. As a compromise to modding.
I would like to add 5 for high priority: cleaning up loose ends from Uru offline even when that means retrofitting again to reduce confusion and pointless search for clues and or puzzles that are simply not there.
In order to improve retention the first priority should be to not frustrate/confuse people out.

Here's my issue with 4 and 5. They may enhance the game for veteran players, but new players that have never played Uru, these things are of such low priority they don't appear on the list. New players are turned off by Uru not because it doesn't have tools to customize an area, or because they're confused that it doesn't mesh with Uru: CC. In fact the vast majority of new players have never even played Uru: CC before as they often come to the GoW's forums looking for the fan content not realizing they need a copy of a completely different game to play them.

Have we ever seen a new player post an issue on these forums with "Why don't we have tools to customize our neighborhood's." or "Why does the Watcher's Pub not look like the one from Uru: CC"? If the answer is no than clearly they're not issues for keeping the new player's in MOULa. Can we still address these issues? Sure, but they are not a pressing concern at the moment.

tommyap · **Posted:** Thu May 15, 2014 1:22 pm

ChloeRhodes wrote:

Here's my issue with 4 and 5. They may enhance the game for veteran players, but new players that have never played Uru, these things are of such low priority they don't appear on the list. New players are turned off by Uru not because it doesn't have tools to customize an area, or because they're confused that it doesn't mesh with Uru: CC. In fact the vast majority of new players have never even played Uru: CC before as they often come to the GoW's forums looking for the fan content not realizing they need a copy of a completely different game to play them.

ChloeRhodes wrote:

Have we ever seen a new player post an issue on these forums with "Why don't we have tools to customize our neighborhood's." or "Why does the Watcher's Pub not look like the one from Uru: CC"? If the answer is no than clearly they're not issues for keeping the new player's in MOULa. Can we still address these issues? Sure, but they are not a pressing concern at the moment.

I thought the intention was to improve retention for all players not only the new ones. I agree with you where new players are concerned. I seriously doubt that a player quitting on his/her first day would post on this forum.

Nalates · **Posted:** Thu May 15, 2014 3:48 pm

ChloeRhodes wrote:

Nal, no one has disagreed here with your basic premise of player retention being a major factor for Uru. Nor has anyone disagreed with the idea of P v P being a component that helps with player retention and something that Uru can benefit from.
…

In this thread, mostly yes. (Do you have tommyap blocked?) But, it is common practice in this forum and the previous thread to discount studies simply because they disagree with a person’s ideas and they don’t pursue anything more than their own, usually uninformed, ideas/opinions.

You may have seen the problem of player retention. But, we have a number of people once again promoting ideas we have tried. Again and again I see people repeat our past mistakes because they don’t know Uru’s community history.

You seem to have missed the thrust of what I am pushing, that what needs to be done to improve Uru and make it more interesting is a well researched subject, game development. All one has to do is start reading. Instead you seem to want to push me into the same pointless game of telling the community to do this or that and pumping out ideas of what will fix Uru. I’ve tried that. And watched what numerous others have tried in that line. I decided there are better ways to influence people.

ChloeRhodes wrote:

Over the years we've presented a wide range of ways to fix Uru's player retention, many of which are outlined in the studies you've posted too, and ways that can be incorporated into Uru. Rather than address these ideas, and offer up various ways to change, modify, or add to these ideas yourself, you've seemed IMO to want to simply restart the discussion from scratch over and over again. I'm going to cross post my solutions from the locked thread, I ask that you look them over and address these three things point by point and tell me what you think of them as solutions to the player retention issue and why you think they will or will not work:

I usually only post these threads in response to someone calling people down a path we have already taken and seen repeatedly produce negative results. You don’t seem to have noticed… This one was started because a previous thread was locked, which seemed a shame as it seemed to be moving forward.

Your outline of things that can be done to improve Uru is made of points I see as positive and probably effective. But, as presented the uninformed are likely to object and fail to understand why the changes would improve player retention. They are the ones that need to gain understanding of game design and pushed to move off their personal imaginings and find real knowledge.

Lord Chaos wrote:

…
My main point is that, somehow, we need to encourage people to think of new presentations. We also need to encourage other people to look into those new things. Second Life is an interesting case study, as I've done a number of events there and found that it's very hard to attract people to a new type of event from the established ones. People tend to do what's familiar, which affects the studies and surveys.
…

Your post really seems to mix ideas… so, we are likely confused about what we respectively mean.

I do know people that hate change. Those people have been a challenge here. So, if you mean getting people to accept Uru in new formats, I’ll point out they need a reason to. Consider tommyap…

belford · **Joined:** Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:01 pm **Posts:** 1890

Quote:

So, if you mean getting people to accept Uru in new formats, I’ll point out they need a reason to.

Okay, so I built a system which is Uru in a new format. (All text.)

Getting a lot of people to use it has been a challenge. On the other hand, *nobody* has posted telling me that I'm a terrible person or that I'm ruining Uru.

What-if forum threads attract arguments, but actually getting something up and running is a positive thing.

tommyap · **Posted:** Thu May 15, 2014 10:32 pm

@Nalates
What gives you the idea that i am trying to block change?
The only thing i have done is object to waving studies about without suggesting a single solution or at
least an approuch. If you have a store of ideas brought forward before that are rehashed again and again
and argued impossible or proven to have no effect then post them so that later arrivals are not wasting
their time.
Skydiving has proven to improve retention a great deal.
Do you have any studies to explain that?
If not you may reconsider shooting down people with ridiculous ideas.
You are passionate about this game, so am i.
(edited for typo)

ChloeRhodes · **Joined:** Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:29 am **Posts:** 520

Nalates wrote:

In this thread, mostly yes. (Do you have tommyap blocked?) But, it is common practice in this forum and the previous thread to discount studies simply because they disagree with a person’s ideas and they don’t pursue anything more than their own, usually uninformed, ideas/opinions.

Obviously I do not have tommyap blocked as he and I were posting back and forth with each other just in this same thread. Apparently you missed that I see. And as he just posted ahead of me, he doesn't disagree that player retention is an issue, but he disagrees with your use of studies in relation to predicting human behavior. Something I think you'll find many people will disagree with you, because the nature of studies is to collect from research from a small pool of individuals, the smaller the pool the less indicative the study is. And predicting human behavior is even more difficult. You seem to think it's an easy task when, generally speaking, humans by nature, are unpredictable creatures. Yes humans tend to settle into specific patterns within their day to day lives, but these patterns vary between the large amount of humans on the planet. Market Research etc into a specific area and trying to predict what humans will buy, six months, a year into future is a sound practice on paper, but one should not base their product around that study because peoples attitudes change widely based upon current conditions.

Quote:

You seem to have missed the thrust of what I am pushing, that what needs to be done to improve Uru and make it more interesting is a well researched subject, game development. All one has to do is start reading. Instead you seem to want to push me into the same pointless game of telling the community to do this or that and pumping out ideas of what will fix Uru. I’ve tried that. And watched what numerous others have tried in that line. I decided there are better ways to influence people.

Nal, I understand you've been apart from the Uru community for awhile, you don't generally come into game very often anymore as you're all busy in SL and what not. You by your own words are out of touch with the development of the engine, and fan content, and most of the efforts going into fixing Uru. To have you come push us in and try to tell us that what needs to be done to fix Uru is researching in depth game development speaks volumes on to how LITTLE you know of what we as developers are doing. Do you honestly believe that we're just throwing things at a wall and seeing what sticks and what doesn't? Has it not occurred to you that perhaps we've all ready done years of research with our target audience. Getting opinions from people on these very forums about what works for them, what they'd like to see? Do you not think we haven't had lengthy discussions with the the current, and former members of Cyan's development team bout what they were trying to accomplish, what they failed to accomplish, what they wanted to do to fix the problems but just couldn't do?

Quote:

Your outline of things that can be done to improve Uru is made of points I see as positive and probably effective. But, as presented the uninformed are likely to object and fail to understand why the changes would improve player retention. They are the ones that need to gain understanding of game design and pushed to move off their personal imaginings and find real knowledge.

And again, if you're paying a modicrum of attention to this thread you'll notice that no one has objected to any of these ideas, and in fact the very person you suggested would has not only agreed with them, but offered up ideas on how to improve them as well as additional ideas that can go along with fixing the player retention issue with veteran players.

Meridian 59

Who is online