Don’t forget we moved!
https://brandmu.day/
Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion
-
@Warlander said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH:
Sadly, this game may now be dead.
The vast majority of players/alts suddenly disappeared without any warning roughly two months ago, and logons have been limited to a handful of people ever since. Any other logons besides are limited to popping on and right back off.
Does anybody know just what’s going on there? There was nothing to suggest that anything was wrong. Just a sudden and near-total decline in game population.
I honestly don’t know. Director, the head GM, needed or wanted to take a two week break to recharge and so far as I can tell, never actually came back. Other staff tried to pick up what had been set down, but I don’t think it was exactly the same. Or at the very least, the main storyline was never continued, and it was more smaller plots.
Which is a damn shame, because I really enjoyed that game. There were aspects I didn’t enjoy, as I thought one or two characters had ‘Main Character’ syndrome vibes going on but, overall? I’d say it was a really good game with a really good group of players and it’s really a shame that the game flickered out with more of a whimper than a bang. As I think it had so much potential for some really good stories.
I miss it, and I’d probably go back if the game picked back up. I will occasionally check in, if there’s been any kind of bulletin update or the like, but overall, the beginning of the game’s end started to rapidly accelerate somewhere around mid to late April. And by the end of May it was more or less a ghost town.
-
Yeah I honestly really enjoyed this game but it seems like after the 1st plot arc (the prologue) it started to go downward with Director having to step back. I completely understand needing a break, but they did seem to never come back from it and I really hope they’re alright.
I do believe, like @Coin said, most of the previous players are on Game with Zombies now.
-
I got a similar ‘main character’ vibe from a small handful of chars on there (there was a faint ‘we’re the game’s IMPORTANT clique’ vibe to some of them, too), but overall it was a good game, with lots of possibilities. It seems very unlikely it’ll ever come back, and I’m very sorry to see it go (temporarily or otherwise).
BTW, is Game With Zombies an actual name, or does that place have a different name?
-
@Warlander said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH:
BTW, is Game With Zombies an actual name, or does that place have a different name?
It’s the game’s actual name.
-
@Testament Nevermind, I found it.
Should’ve looked closer before.By the way, thanks!
-
Was (and could still be) really good fun, like others said the main Game Runner needed a break but hasn’t come back from it. Hope they are well and life is treating them kindly.
Would certainly pick up the game once more should they return. Loved how individual scenes reacting to the metaplot posts felt like they made such a difference. As well as being the first ARES game I could get into.
-
@Whisky said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH:
Was (and could still be) really good fun, like others said the main Game Runner needed a break but hasn’t come back from it. Hope they are well and life is treating them kindly.
Would certainly pick up the game once more should they return. Loved how individual scenes reacting to the metaplot posts felt like they made such a difference. As well as being the first ARES game I could get into.
This was something I appreciated that I thought was really unique and a great way for people to get involved. When Director would randomly tap someone and say ‘hey, do you want to do this thing that’ll help push the story?’. It was always so casual and fun. It was something I had done on Seven Nations, but nothing that seemed to be so successful initially.
That’s one of the biggest things I miss about LA.
-
SOMEONE named @Roz was bullying me and I realized I should have split off the discussion on the LA2043 from the ads before. BUT I DID NOW.
-
Moved from Game Ads by
Tez
-
Yeah, this place has been deader than a doornail.
As I’m pretty cautious with time/energy investment these days,
I really limited my buy-in and participation. Looking at the game, I had questions about plot momentum and wasn’t really sure what to do other than more slice-of-life rp. I also made a very lazy (for me) character but it was an incredibly cool theme/setting.Alas, it wasn’t to be.
-
I had high hopes for the game. Too bad it went down so quickly.
But games need stories. When the stories go away, the players will too. There have been a few Ares games like that lately.
Oddly enough, the ease with which you can open a game on your own also tends to lead people into doing so more often, unprepared for the burden they’re taking on. It used to be that in order to open a game you needed a team. You needed coders, STs, admins. You looked around got the team together and then, eventually, opened a game. The team was there to support each other and carry the burden as a group. Now, people just go it solo, get quickly overwhelmed and then have to bail on the responsibility.
Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.
-
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.
You should. It might last, it might not, but at least stuff’s being made even for a moment.
He/Him. Opinions and views are solely my own unless specifically stated otherwise.
BE AN ADULT -
@Pavel Agreed. A game doesn’t have to last 5-10 years to be a success.
-
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.
Why not?
-
@Pavel said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.
You should. It might last, it might not, but at least stuff’s being made even for a moment.
Agree to disagree. If a game was made with a purpose of only lasting 2-3 months, then I think that would be fine and I’d be on board with it. But this isn’t about the length of time a game is open. It is about what the game runner wanted for their game.
@KarmaBum said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.
Why not?
I don’t think anyone involved with the games that are dying out quickly planned for that or wanted it to happen that way. Instead, there’s a lot of wasted/unrealized potential for stories to be told and disappointment in the result on both sides of the staff/player aisle. Also, likely a lot of work that went into creating these places that people consider a waste of time once it mostly goes unused and unrealized.
I don’t think that’s what anyone was hoping for with their ideas/efforts. There would likely be a more robust experience on both sides if there was just a little more patience and support on the game to give the experience that was expected/desired. I don’t think anyone wants to go into a game as staff or player to feel a growing sense of disappointment as the game peters out a few months in.
Of course, this is just my humble opinion. But its evidenced by the fact that these games aren’t dying out because there aren’t stories to tell or stories have been wrapped up. Its by head staffers saying, “I need a break” right in the middle (or in some cases at the beginning) of their initial stories and then not coming back. That can’t have been the plan. And of course, some of these games aren’t even making it out of the Alpha or Beta stages. Again, that can’t be what people want for the games they open.
Being responsible for a game is a heavy burden. Not everyone is prepared for it. Not everyone wants to continue once they’re under the pressure of carrying it, especially if they’re doing it alone.
And I feel bad for these games because most of them have had great concepts and in most cases pretty good execution, but it just could not become the place they wanted it to be, the place it really could be, because the game runners didn’t have the support they needed to keep it going.
TLDR: If the game runners are happy with their game and the way it ends, then A+ all around. But I don’t think that’s the case with most of these.
-
@Warma-Sheen Sure, it’s not the plan, and it’s disappointing. But I’d rather be disappointed in a game petering out than in games not being made.
-
@Pavel I hear that. We just have different opinions/perspectives on it. I definitely prefer not to get invested into something at all than to have it be a disappointing experience.
I’m curious as to other opinions on the matter. I could be the lone weirdo on that end.
I don’t know if that needs to be a separate topic or something, but it would be interesting to hear from others.
-
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
I’m curious as to other opinions on the matter. I could be the lone weirdo on that end.
You likely aren’t, and it’s not a weird position to hold.
I just know that the days of yore are behind us, and assembling a team who can create and run a game for any length of time is difficult. We’re most of us old, with more commitments outside the MU sphere than before.
I don’t think the hobby’s dying, or anything, but it’s certainly not as vibrant of populous as it once was. More, smaller games with shorter life expectancies are the future as far as I can see it. Run by one or two people.
Certainly, larger more ‘traditional’ games will and can exist, but with the advent of more easily and readily accessible async options, the ease of Ares and other such software working out of the box rather than relying on on-staff coders and the various old codebases… Even a numpty like me could open a game tomorrow and run it to some moderate level of success.
-
@Warma-Sheen I don’t think you have spoken to Director and actually know what happened in this instance. You are talking in generalizations about a specific topic.
-
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Of course, this is just my humble opinion. But its evidenced by the fact that these games aren’t dying out because there aren’t stories to tell or stories have been wrapped up. Its by head staffers saying, “I need a break” right in the middle (or in some cases at the beginning) of their initial stories and then not coming back. That can’t have been the plan. And of course, some of these games aren’t even making it out of the Alpha or Beta stages. Again, that can’t be what people want for the games they open.
This isn’t what happened in this specific case and this conversation should be spun off into a different thread. Right now all you are doing is assigning blame to somebody when you don’t even know the truth, and to be honest? It’s this sort of thing that keeps people from running games.
LA was fun, exciting and different. The person who ran the game is inventive, creative, and amazing. But sometimes games don’t work out for whatever reason, and that’s OK. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t keep trying.
-
@bear_necessities said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:
Of course, this is just my humble opinion. But its evidenced by the fact that these games aren’t dying out because there aren’t stories to tell or stories have been wrapped up. Its by head staffers saying, “I need a break” right in the middle (or in some cases at the beginning) of their initial stories and then not coming back. That can’t have been the plan. And of course, some of these games aren’t even making it out of the Alpha or Beta stages. Again, that can’t be what people want for the games they open.
This isn’t what happened in this specific case and this conversation should be spun off into a different thread. Right now all you are doing is assigning blame to somebody when you don’t even know the truth, and to be honest? It’s this sort of thing that keeps people from running games.
LA was fun, exciting and different. The person who ran the game is inventive, creative, and amazing. But sometimes games don’t work out for whatever reason, and that’s OK. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t keep trying.
Man, thank you. Because this vague insinuation that Director bailed and crushed all these people’s hopes and dreams of stories really started to get my blood pressure up. He’s a really cool dude, who is engaging, funny, and a great time.
