unforum

[Rogi Ocnorb]

Phae... Just so we're clear.
I don't think the rules are silly.

[Phaedra]

[chippy]

I would agree with buff and rowan in the main, the issue is mainly how we can get the message across, not how the forums can work. The forums being a player resource. If a game is good then the players will take it forward, if it sucks, then its destined to lanquish in the "lower forums"... So the main issue is getting the message across...Sucessful PMs, bloggers, news items, magazine articles, interviews have a kind of obligation to say "hey, you may think a couple of websites and a story on a peice of A4 makes an arg... but it will knacker you out... heres the real story" . . . basically give an unbiased, impartial, frank telling of how and what its like to make an arg. Also, theres the message to be sent to players too, I particularly love the very tactful and true message on ARGN "mileage may vary".. just give a little "buyer beware" to players saying "you get what you pay for"...in these games we pay with our time and attention.

As an aside, like FLmutant hints at, this is where the whole curtain thing comes into play, PMs can't, and dont want to speak about the stuff they are working on for the future or the stuff thats active... indeed in this community it is kinda frowned upon, we like the curtains up. One exception to this seems to be Mind Candy, perhaps because its in their business model, however I really dont think it affects peoples play. People can suspend their disbelief in multiple ways, players of perplex can know inside themselves that this group of PMs run things and read about them talk about the game that they play, but they also simultaneously know that theres a real alternate universe existing, and mind candy is just ancillary to that.

<hypothesising>
Maybe having a semi-transparent curtain would be the best of both worlds? Maybe a curtain also hides the PM from the community, providing a barrier to accountability, maybe knowing about the PM would make a better game, informed choices?
</hypothesising>

So, as a community we do owe it to ourselves, to others, and to the world, to inform and educate people about Alternate Reality Gaming.

[rose]

[colin]

side notes to the previous conversation:
- I'm a bit worried Unfiction is becoming the centre of the universe (again)
- As far as helping PMs. My gut feeling is; by the time a game launches, it's probably to late to save it: The PM is unlikely to be able to make substantially more time available.
- Maybe a double sided solution needs to be looked at, Players should limit there exposure to bad games, and we can help PMs.
- Which games are really imploding? Is it only games that start on UF by PM posting or AIM? just don't play them would be an easy way to avoid being caught in it.

Idea: Reviewing ARGs
An idea I've been kicking around is reviewing ARGs. Again this is no pancea, but hopefully it would allow new players to get an idea of what is worth playing. Experienced players could read it to help them form their own opinions about that game in question. Maybe individuals could even add there own reviews.

Obviously there are issues to be worked out, the main one being that the game can't be previewed, but I think these can be worked on.

Hopefully over time this review site will become an entry point into the ARG community, much like ARGN.com acts. Once that is happening new players will be exposed to what is 'good' and 'bad' and have a better idea of what they are doing for their first time PMing.

It's certainly not an overnight solutions. However I think it:
- Adds value to the existing community (by providing another resource, a resource which doesn't exist currently)
- Helps the implosion issue (in warning that a game doesn't look good, and exposing potential PMs to what they 'should do')
- Would be a great way to get new people into the community (Even as I type this there is someone in IRC asking how often games launch, the other night someone asked for a 'scary ARG' to play etc etc)

Again, I'm not proposing a perfect solution. It's a question of whether it represents an improvement to the current situation or not.

That's my suggestion.

[catherwood]

[GuyP]

The problem is people making games when they really shouldn't. Have we laboured this point again and again? Yes. Then why does the problem persist?

Because "failing to prepare or successfully execute a good ARG" and "failing to read any of the existing information and advice available" are both symptomatic of the same characteristic. Call it arrogance, call it giddy over-enthusiasm, it's up to you. The people who need to be reading the stark warnings regarding solo-PMing and "winging it" aren't, sadly enough, the kind of people who are going to bother. After all, they're very very busy making sites about OmG theAVENGER is COMING qU0th t3H RaV3N n3v3r M0r3.

Essentially, then, I'm inclined to think we can never really prevent crappy games being made. On the other hand, we can avoid playing them - I vote with my feet and avoid stuff that looks like it's been created by a thousand monkeys chained to a thousand Geocities accounts. Like catherwood, I find it a fairly simple distinction to make. That leaves only first-time ARGers to get burned, which I think we'd all agree is a pretty sad state of affairs. Apart from bursting into crappy-looking trailhead threads, though, and spouting "GET OUTTA HERE! THE WHOLE THING'S GONNA BLOW, BABY, WE GOTTA GO!" then I feel we're somewhat powerless to intervene.

As to directly breaking the Unfiction TOS, I think the current modus operandi is reasonably effective. I'm not terribly full of sympathy for PMs that fall afoul of the rules. They're easy enough to see, and if they haven't made the effort to pick up on them I doubt they've made much effort to put together a half-decent game.

So, eh, I don't know. I feel pretty bad for you, Rose, because it's a nice idea, and maybe you feel like it's been sabotaged by the Grumpy Brigade. Essentially I agree that "being nice" is good, and so is moving the post-mortem to META, but I'm not particularly sold on the email idea. In contrast to your perspective, though, I've seen plenty of games fold and everyone's been lovely and respectful, even when it's been a bit rubbish. In fact, I've seen PMs act badly, and the moment they apologise everyone has just let bygones be bygones.

Generally, spite tends to emerge when players feel they've been treated badly by a PM, and Renata Isle is a case in point. By breaking the ToS, perpetually postponing the game, failing to accept (or at least withstand) what I thought was totally reasonable criticism and finally melting it down with a vindictive rant against his players, he should hardly have been expecting a medal.

So the way to avoid games imploding is for would-be PMs to actually accept it's really hard work, do the best they can, abide by the rules, and if absolutely necessary bow out in a polite and apologetic manner, and we'll absolutely let the matter rest. In short: don't suck and be an ass about it too.

[MageSteff]

[FLmutant]

[Phaedra]

[Slyfox]

This is perhaps a little off topic but I'd like to see more post-mortems of the good games as well as the bad. I don't believe there's a game yet that hasn't had its weak points. From a PM's perspective the post game adulation over a successfully completed game is great but any constructive criticism that makes the next one even better is more useful in the long term.

[rowan]

Maybe we just need a PM FAQ or quickstart guide. Something that spells out the specific rules that need to be followed here and where to go for either assistance on the game, or someone to talk to in case problems arise. Just a one stop shopping area for PMs who have never dealt with UF before.

[rose]

As I mentioned, if the issue is the people who are doing the emailing, I think that we can find people to do that. Also, I think we can find people who don't have a problem with contacting a PM because it might ruin their level of immersion. As for how the PMs might react to what I suggested, I am sure we can write something that is helpful and not offensive. I think I would be willing to risk someone being offended by an email that says " we wish you success and by the way here is some information." It doesn't seem likely to happen, even as a remote possibility

Actually, now that I write this, I see no reason why the site admins or moderators need to take on this task. If everyone has such an issue with this as an official unfiction job, then perhaps players could take on this relatively simple task.

[Pixiestix]

Speaking as a player only, I will have to agree with Scrappy's and Rowan's views on curtain for a player. I don't really like knowing who the PMs are, addressing them before a game ends {in whatever manner it happens in}. Heck, if there is an issue with an in-game website that a PM needs to be aware of, i tell a character with as much ingame wording as possible {Example - Urban Hunt page went craked and gave away info i luckily had not seen, but i contacted "Ed" about his in-game website to tell him about it}.

One of the things I have seen said a couple times here is that by contacting the PMs the Mod of choice would then have to give up their option to play. As a Mod, they are already skirting on the edge of the curtains as it is, and many don't want that sneak peak. I think asking a player to do it instead... Well, personally, if I am not interested in playing the game, I am not interested in babysitting it either. If I am interested in playing it, I don't want to contact the PM. While I realize I am obviously not the end all be all of players opinions, I think you will find the majority like the curtain.

I'm not thrilled with the amounts of games imploding, I don't think anyone is. I just don't think that we, the unfiction community, should take it upon themselves to babysit PMs - new or not. We have links to the player resources as well as PM resources. Heck, the link to the rules are at the top of the page. I know that often I am a member of the "let us tear the jerky PM apart" when they ignore the rules, but that is only after they have been told over and over that what they are doing is against the rules, thus shoing little to no reguard for the rules of this community nor the players in it. If they are starting a game by way of trailhead here, and they don't read the rules, I don't feel it should be Mod or player responsibility to feel sorry for them when their game implodes, and I have noticed more often than not that IS the cause of the implosion when a game is started here.

Yes, there are the cases where the PMs are just inexperienced, think they know what they are doing, start too soon, take it on alone, etc etc etc. I don't think sending them an extra note saying "hey, didyou know this was here" about how to plan and run an ARG is going to help once the game is launched. I believe someone already said it, but I forget who so I cannot quote - Once the game is afoot, it is too late to fix it.

I adore and respect your opinions here Rose, as I do everyone else who has posted here, but I also don't think that as a player resource site the owners and Mods are doing it to the best of their ability short of babysitting the PMs already.

[Ethernull]

Just throwing out an idea here. What if:

A second membership account type was made for "PM"s. It garners no special treatment or other benefits but it is a prompt at account creation.

On the sign up form "Are you a (select one) Player [ ] or a PuppetMaster [x]"

The confirmation email that we all got automatically when we joined would have the extra bit for PM's, stating UFs rules and code of conduct as it pertains to them, and linking to either the PM guide forums, DeadDrop or some other resource for planning and collaboration.

Once the innitial change is made there are no extra duties and no curtain burning for the mods here.

An additional idea, for all that it goes against the "no multiple accounts" rule is to have a member that has been a player create a PM account when they want to run a game. Could even go so far as to create a forum section that is hidden to player accounts and viewable to PM accounts so that PMs could have meta discussions about the games with other experienced PM mentors in an area that doesnt burn the curtain. If you log into your PM account and read a thread on that forum titled "Renata Isle, need help maintaining" your stepping through the curtain willingly.

I understand that its quite a change to how UF appears to function now, but it doesnt seem like it would change play style at all.

Thoughts and flames are welcome,

Ethernull