03-18-2011, 03:46 AM
I just got home, a little while ago, and I will respond at length probably tomorrow, sometime, or maybe later tonight, if I don't go to bed before that.
If you go through the various editorials that I have written pertaining to PBM, you will likely find that I point fingers at many different things. Some things that I will likely point a finger at, I haven't even written about, yet.
It was Terry's posting in another thread from earlier, today, that mentioned the "true flavor" of special actions, and that got me to thinking, which in turn led to me writing this article off the cuff.
It doesn't bother me that any or all of you disagree with part or all of what was posted in this editorial. It would be far more bothersome if you disagreed - but then didn't bother to take time and post.
Rich Van Ollefen of Flying Dutchman games fame, the guy who programmed Victory!, and the guy who is trying to brink back Far Horizons are all a part of this discussion about play by mail. Even if this discussion thread were to die tomorrow (and I certainly hope that it doesn't), the combination of you three guys posting on the same topic in the same online discussion thread makes this a discussion of considerable significance. I'm sure that Walter wishes that I would post some more editorials that you guys disagree with enough to post your own views on the subject matter under discussion.
It's not exactly the easiest thing, these days, trying to get people talking, much less talking at length, about gaming of the postal variety kind. Yet, without people posting about PBM, visitors to the site will have nothing to read when they finally do happen across the site - assuming that they do manage to find it.
Look back at Terry's quote, above. If you've got a commercial PBM game with hundreds - or even a thousand - paying customers playing it, then what is the cut-off point to generate a profit, as far as how many paying customers does it take before the cost of additional GMs could be hired?
And for all of the good things that automation in programming brings with it, there is still the flavor issue. A human being in the role of moderator can certainly bring a great deal of imagination value to a game. How does one quantify the value of that, compared to automation?
Automation can reduce human errors. It can improve speed and efficiency in processing turn orders and turn results. It can make a game expandable to virtually an infinite number of players. But, automation also comes at a price. Automation is not an all-positive approach to running PBM games.
For those who think that play by mail is dead, yet who wonder why, shouldn't we explore all kinds of possibilities that may have contributed to the PBM industry's current state?
If you go through the various editorials that I have written pertaining to PBM, you will likely find that I point fingers at many different things. Some things that I will likely point a finger at, I haven't even written about, yet.
It was Terry's posting in another thread from earlier, today, that mentioned the "true flavor" of special actions, and that got me to thinking, which in turn led to me writing this article off the cuff.
It doesn't bother me that any or all of you disagree with part or all of what was posted in this editorial. It would be far more bothersome if you disagreed - but then didn't bother to take time and post.
Rich Van Ollefen of Flying Dutchman games fame, the guy who programmed Victory!, and the guy who is trying to brink back Far Horizons are all a part of this discussion about play by mail. Even if this discussion thread were to die tomorrow (and I certainly hope that it doesn't), the combination of you three guys posting on the same topic in the same online discussion thread makes this a discussion of considerable significance. I'm sure that Walter wishes that I would post some more editorials that you guys disagree with enough to post your own views on the subject matter under discussion.
It's not exactly the easiest thing, these days, trying to get people talking, much less talking at length, about gaming of the postal variety kind. Yet, without people posting about PBM, visitors to the site will have nothing to read when they finally do happen across the site - assuming that they do manage to find it.
Look back at Terry's quote, above. If you've got a commercial PBM game with hundreds - or even a thousand - paying customers playing it, then what is the cut-off point to generate a profit, as far as how many paying customers does it take before the cost of additional GMs could be hired?
And for all of the good things that automation in programming brings with it, there is still the flavor issue. A human being in the role of moderator can certainly bring a great deal of imagination value to a game. How does one quantify the value of that, compared to automation?
Automation can reduce human errors. It can improve speed and efficiency in processing turn orders and turn results. It can make a game expandable to virtually an infinite number of players. But, automation also comes at a price. Automation is not an all-positive approach to running PBM games.
For those who think that play by mail is dead, yet who wonder why, shouldn't we explore all kinds of possibilities that may have contributed to the PBM industry's current state?