From: lazarus@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: MUDs and Reality (Theory, LONG)
Date: 17 Dec 1992 05:29:02 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Now, I could follow your own thoery better than the other (sorry
Tagi), and ironically, your post parallels a LOT of things that I'm
currently involved in.

First, I'll cover your point on MUDs in particular.  I HAVE noticed
that, on the Multi-User Dungeons as well as many other computer
communications (like the Relay net that can be accessed through a lot
of campus mainframes), many people logon for the social aspect, and
sadly, a few of these expect to get computer sex... an idea that some-
how totally eludes me.  With MUDs, there IS a lot of flirting going on,
and in the one I'm currently playing in, there's even a set-up for
characters to get "married".  When players are in the game, it's not
so much that the character is a part of them, or vice-versa, but in
essence, that player IS that character.

There are the few examples of actual role-play that goes on... these
are usually the more serious gamers who are bucking to become a "Wizard"
and to build their own "castle".  I'm one of those players, and my
mainstay happens to be a female character (personality, outlook and
appearance, to some effect, based on a Super-Hero RPG character).  In
dealing with all of the other players through their characters, it's
easy to tell what their main goal is on the game.  Fortunately, the
worst I've had to deal with is some lovestruck newbie who just INSISTS
on going around fighting together.  I avoid flirting (obviously!) like
the plague, and a MUD-marriage is definitely out of the question.  >:)
I tend to ignore the come-ons outright.  I knew how a lot of the guys
treat the girls on those things, and really shouldn't have been suprised
when I signed on with a female character... but it stands to reason that
the female players are just as bad.  ;)

Now, this discussion spills over tremendously into the genre of "real-
life" gaming.  I'm an avid gamer, with favourites like AD&D, Marvel
Super Heroes, Shadowrun, etc.  I'm also currently involved in a debate of
sorts with some other users on the Prodigy system, under a topic called
"AD&D: Satanism?"  One of the arguements against the game is that kids
can get too involved and "become" their characters... leading to actions
or behaviour that's slightly abnormal or to extremes such as murder or
suicide.  Now, we gamers admit that such occurences ARE possible, but we
also point out that for this to happen, the players that succumb to such
breakdowns are pretty unbalanced to begin with.  The drugs and alcohol
that are involved in most of the official cases also have a lot to do with
it.

Returning to the subject of character vs. player, it's almost impossible
to divorce the two.  Unless the player has a split personality.  Now, I'm
not saying that, in having a few female characters, I have a feminine
personality myself... I'm saying that in attempting to role-play one of
these characters, that character WILL have a little bit of my personality.
Even if that character ISN'T tailor-made for my personality.  Some of the
characters in my file will have more of "me" in them than others when I
utilize them in games.

Another thing you mentioned was that in the MUDs you were involved with
players would haul off and kill other characters almost on a whim.
Strangely, although I've seen that in the past, I haven't seen a case of
player-killing on the MUD I frequent in a couple of months.  I've never
participated in such an act myself, though I WILL admit I've been sorely
tempted.  >;)  It's a general rule that player-killing is a major faux
pas.

Ultimately, MUDding is just a waste of time.  I mean, what do you get
out of it?  At best, you might be able to swap addresses (snail-mail AND
e-mail) with the friends you make, but that's about it.  MUD-life is
suprisingly fleet, with some only lasting merely a few months.  There
are a few older MUDs that have endured, but invariably the players lose
access to their character(s) in one way or another, unless they pull some
major miracle or pull some major strings.  So you ask me "why, then, if
it's useless to continue, do you YOURSELF continue to play?", and it's a
valid question.  I find that, among other net activities (reading mail,
chatting with friends, even slogging around Prodigy Bulletin Boards), it
relieves a bit of stress.  It's not that difficult to "succeed" on a MUD,
and a few of the more difficult tasks bring some sense of accomplishment
when I DO finally complete them.  So, in some cases, MUDs aren't really
such a waste of time after all.

Now, I think that Tagi's original post was dealing with Virtual Reality
vs. Real Life, and the philosophical facet of MUDs, where you were
writing more about the psychological aspect.  His point, I think, could
be summarized by asking the question "where does reality end and fantasy
begin?"  By applying it to MUDs specifically, I believe he was stating
that humans COULD create an alternate reality in which to interact with
others, even if you need a computer terminal and a telnet link to do so.

I guess, for the most part, reality is what we make it.  

Bart -Laz- Smith
The 'Cat
(My apologies for the long-winded response)


from