unforum

[lhilt]

Would this alienate an ARG

[thebruce]

If folks were required to download a program to join in the fun, Would I be left without a player base?

hm. Thinking more along the lines of gameplay than security concerns -
I think, if you were to require the program to be downloaded and run by all participants, then you would in effect begin limiting your audience. Now if you made it so that the program isn't required by everyone, but only that it's required by someone in order to reveal elements to further the game, then it could be doable. Ideally, you want to limit as few people as possible by avoiding the imposition of practical limitations on interactivity.

It's kind of like what happens with games carried out over live chat and lots and lots of dialogue. Some people hate scouring endless chat dialogue. And if the only way to really play is to interact with a chat personna, that cuts out a lot of potentially interested players. However, if the chatter reveals story or tasks that others can partake in without being a part of the chat, then it opens the door to more people.

Ultimately, it all depends on who you're aiming your game towards. If you are happy requiring that people download to play, and those are the people you want playing, then by all means. There's no real "right" and "wrong", and plenty of argish projects do work like that. But if you want to have an open game where essentially anyone can opt in and play on what could be considered their own terms, then imposing hard limitations on gameplay wouldn't be the way to go...

Another similarity would be the tools players use to solve a puzzle. If you write an application that is required by someone to move everyone forward, that's like writing a puzzle specific to a certain program, where it's unsolvable unless that program is used. It doesn't require everyone to use the program, but it is in a sense a soft limitation - the story wouldn't progress unless the program is used to solve the puzzle.

In that way, you could write a program that is a central, repeated focus of your game, which must be used in order to further the plot. But if you filter the entire game through that program as a form of interface, then you may also inadvertently filter down your player-base.

[ndemeter]

We were thinking about doing something similar for EE some time ago.

My recommendation would be to go ahead and create the executable, post it on a clearly defined in-game site, then in an OOG site for the game post the golden rule of only downloading the executable from the game site only along with the MD5 hash signature of the program so the players can compare them for tampering.

[thegreatpablo]

It depends. If they absolutely have to download it, then yes. However, if only one or two people need to and they can post the results, then probably not. There's a certain amount of trust that players put in the PMs, even if the PM is someone new, so I'd be willing to bet that a few will download it as long as it's clear that it's part of the game (be careful of people hijacking your game and replacing it with a virus/trojan).

[lhilt]

Awesome responses!

[Nighthawk]

I tried it as a "proof of concept" with the "encryptor"... I figure the only reason anybody downloaded and ran it is because the knew, without a doubt, that it was made by me and I am a professional programmer.

If it were coming from an anonymous, unknown PM, I know there would be no chance in hell that I myself would install it.

[lhilt]

[thebruce]

[Agent Lex]

[ndemeter]

[FLmutant]

[rose]

In the Lucky5 example, I only downloaded it after players like Sidtheduck, johnny5, mapmaker and others - players that I trust completely, downloaded it and assured us it was fine. No offense to any of the EE PMs, but I wouldn't put executable on my computer until people I know and trust as experts tested it first.

So to me trust in the PMs is important but trust in my fellow players is essential.

[Obtusitivity]

[FLmutant]

[Obtusitivity]