[crossfire] Platform statement

[Nicolas Weeger]

Happy new year everyone!

> Actually, I think I'm over-reaching here.  All considerations of *how* to
> deal with gameplay, especially game mechanics, are just IMHO and
> suggestions.  I'll say what I think, reply on threads when asked, but in
> the end, go with whatever the coders decide :-)

No. It's not up to coders/developers to decide. It's up to the gameplay leader 
to decide game mechanisms.
And no gameplay leader is why no one decides anything on the type of game we 
have, why so many questions aren't replied to, so many things are left as an 
exercice to the first one to actually move (meaning no coherence yet again).


Remember: technical stuff is there FOR THE PURPOSE OF GAMEPLAY AND CONTENTS.
Not the other way around.

Content and gameplay should state requirements (features, ...) and have a 
feedback from the technical part about feasability/delays.


So to sum up:
- content leader => handles the story part of the game, maps that are ok or 
not story wise, and such
- gameplay leader => handles combat mechanisms, has a say on quest rewards and 
such, works on non combat stuff, ...
- technical leader => ensures needs of content/gameplay leaders are met, and 
maybe planifies development and such

(of course it's not a total division, everyone can make suggestions - but at 
the end of the day the leaders ACTUALLY DECIDE on their domain)

And we could obviously add interface/client leader, too.

Nicolas

PS: to reply to someone's mail, no, I don't want to be technical leader as 
long as we don't have a gameplay leader - and even so, I'm not sure I'd 
accept.
-- 
http://nicolas.weeger.org [Petit site d'images, de textes, de code, bref de 
l'aléatoire !]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mailman.metalforge.org/pipermail/crossfire/attachments/20090113/9157244a/attachment.pgp