[MUD-Dev] Re: Fun vs Realism [ Was: OT: Sid Meier ]

[Adam Wiggins <adam#angel,com>]

On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Caliban Tiresias Darklock wrote:
> Yes. I keep saying this. Realistic is fun to watch. Realistic is not fun to
> play. If I wanted realistic, I would stay in the real world instead of
> playing a game.
> [...] 
> Challenging is not always fun. The Zork games were loads of fun, even when
> you knew where everything was and what everything did and how everything
> interacted. (In fact, the Zork games were rather crappy before you got a
> good deal of that under your belt.)

As usual, I'll remind everyone to be careful how you define someone else's
"fun".  I think that Zork-style games are mildly amusing the first time
through, and absolute drudgery each time thereafter.

See my other post (yesterday, I think) for my semi-formal breakdown of
"fun"; I'm curious whether I actually managed to capture everyone's
tastes.  There are certainly some wildly different ones on this list
(which is part of why I enjoy reading it).

Adam