Slashdot Mirror


Why Is Free MUD Development Lagging?

Thanks to Skotos for its editorial discussing why free, open-source MUD development is failing to advance swiftly. The author notes "The best [text-based MUD] efforts have been almost entirely closed-source... Free MUDs, by contrast, just haven't advanced very fast." He points to several possible factors, suggesting that "MUD information is indexed poorly, and many projects don't maintain a web site with even a basic description of what they're doing", and continues: "Another reason is licensing. The Diku license is poorly understood and shoddily enforced... LPMUDs aren't much better", before concluding: "There is no existing license that does for MUD servers what the GPL does for applications. That grudging spread of features has never happened for MUD servers the way it has for GPL-licensed applications and libraries."

88 comments

  1. Could it be because MUDs suck? by ObviousGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MUDs are a dying genre. They are swiftly being replaced MMPORGS.

    The whole text-based game industry is being replaced, or has been replaced, by games with visuals because there is no good reason to restrict gameplay to text-only when you can spruce it up with immersive graphical environments.

    So with MUDs, someone decides to build one as a project and it gains a few players, but after a while everyone leaves and the MUD dies. Repeat every semester as some new college kid decides that he wants to build his own MUD.

    So you end up with people inventing the same tech over and over, but never improving on the past projects because no one bothered to document their project the semester before. But also because the project is mostly intended to polish programming skills and try out some game design techniques, the game itself is hardly ever more than a proof of concept and it never captures the attention of gamers as much as Everquest or any other professionally-designed game.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When will college kids be able to use set of graphics components to make their own everquest style graphical muds ?

    2. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Matthew+Bafford · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Plus, the more established MUDs don't want to share code because they want to hang on to whatever advantage they have over every other MUD.

      It's too easy to start up a new MUD (unzip, compile, run), so each MUD wants to hold on tight to whatever advantage they have. It's a shame that more MUD owners don't realize it's the people and the environment that make a good MUD, NOT the special features (for the most part).

      -y

    3. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did the Everquest programmers get theirs?

      Oh yeah, they made them themselves.

    4. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 5, Informative
      The whole text-based game industry is being replaced, or has been replaced, by games with visuals because there is no good reason to restrict gameplay to text-only when you can spruce it up with immersive graphical environmen

      Sort of like how those old text-based "books" disappeared shortly after the invention of the motion picture?

      --
      True story.
    5. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Cecil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The whole text-based game industry is being replaced, or has been replaced, by games with visuals because there is no good reason to restrict gameplay to text-only when you can spruce it up with immersive graphical environments.

      You're wrong. There's one very good, and very solid reason that MMORPGs will never provide quite the same thing as text-based environments (specifically MOOs, MUCKs, MUSHes, etc): user-created-content.

      Anyone who has a basic grasp of a language (and most people do -- though IM conversations sometimes indicate otherwise) can create whatever their imagination desires simply by writing some mediocre descriptive prose to get their message across. Short of sudden and marked advances in brain-to-computer interface technology, the artistically-challenged among us will never be able to as fully express our imaginations in a MMORPG, even one of the few that allows user-created-content. And the people who are excellent artists often find that it's a lot simpler and more convenient to simply write some description than do high-quality artwork or 3D models for whatever it is they're imagining.

      So don't be so quick to abandon those text based worlds. There will always be some that survive and even flourish. Admittedly, the number of players has been thinning out significantly in the past several years, and we don't believe it'll stop anytime in the near future. But you'd be surprised how many new players we still continue to get, and how many reasons they have for staying.

    6. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by DrMorris · · Score: 2, Insightful

      there is no good reason to restrict gameplay to text-only when you can spruce it up with immersive graphical environments

      You completely forgot the fact that some things are simply not possible to "implement" in super-duper graphical games. Don't underestimate the role of the player's fantasy!

      It's kind of like saying that books are a dying genre, because the industry is moving towards movies... :-)

    7. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Paolomania · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's too easy to start up a new MUD (unzip, compile, run), so each MUD wants to hold on tight to whatever advantage they have. It's a shame that more MUD owners don't realize it's the people and the environment that make a good MUD, NOT the special features (for the most part).

      But with so much game logic in scripts nowadays, doesn't it make sense to use a common, open source MUD platform, but distinguish yourself by the quality of the content and social network that your MUD offers? Lot of web sites serve their pages with Apache, but they don't have to open source their page generators and all the HTML that comes out.

    8. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by MBraynard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think you are making a very big mistake in your reasoning. Just because it is easy for anyone to CREATE CONTENT does mean people WILL PLAY MUDs for that reason. It's a big disconnect.

      Besides, even the difference you are pointing to between MUDs and MMORPGs is gone now thanks to Second Life, where you can design pretty much any content you want.

      Your error reminds me of a common error in the talk radio business - confusing 'lots of callers' with 'lots of listeners.'

    9. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by rholliday · · Score: 2, Informative

      MUDs are alive and well. They say development is lagging, but there are a lot of MUDs that have playerbases rivaling some of the smaller MMORPGs.

      I'm an Imm. I won't shamelessly plug the tiny MUD I work on, but there is a lot that goes into running a MUD. Mostly the people that keep it working do so out of pure love for their particular little slice of the Telnet Protocol. I don't see MUDs dying, but I also don't see them increasing exponentially, either. The developers of MUDs are nowhere near as sophisticated or organized as open source developers, nor will they ever seek such a union, for dozens of reasons that have already been belabored to death.

      The point about the licenses is a good one. There's not a single MUD out there that isn't heavily derived from one of the original ones. Every single one of those codebases specified all sorts of restrictions, including not making money off the product. If there's never a (legal) chance that you'll actually get anything out of your product, then your fervor kind of dies.

      --
      Xbox reviews.. We think they're funny.
    10. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Matthew+Bafford · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree, that's why I wrote:

      It's a shame that more MUD owners don't realize it's the people and the environment that make a good MUD, NOT the special features (for the most part).

      Back when I developed for a MUD, I shared as much of the code as I could. There was no real easy way to do so and have the results go back into the main code base, though. Most of the contributions consisted of "snippets" sent to a collection. The end result was a lot of buggy untested code (not mine!) that newbies tried to incorporate all at once into the parent code base. Chaos...

      -y

    11. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There's a difference though: Most graphical games are fairly text-heavy. Nearly any graphical RPG still has just as much text as an old text-based RPG. A movie (or play, or opera) doesn't have as much text as a novel of simmilar scope.

      Movies aren't a technological advancement on books, they're a technological advancement on theater, and they have contributed to a major decline in live theater.

      Graphical games are, however, a technological advancement over text based games, and they have already replaced nearly all of them. The only single-player text based games are freeware and developed by amateur programmers. The last major hangers-on to the genre are MUDs. MUDs are a dying breed. There used to be any number of them, and you could usually find a newly opened one any time you were bored. Now, there's only a handful left, and nobody's making new ones.

    12. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by IpalindromeI · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's not a single MUD out there that isn't heavily derived from one of the original ones.

      How about this one?

      --

      --
      Promoting critical thinking since 1994.
    13. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by scrytch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But with so much game logic in scripts nowadays, doesn't it make sense to use a common, open source MUD platform

      It's already been done, DGD, MOO, Cold, are quite nicely programmable generic platforms. It's certainly not technology stopping anyone, even if the languages are somewhat aging and others might prefer to program in, say, Python (I patched Python to make it a multi-user-safe runtime once, it's not horribly difficult). There's quite a few, for lack of a better term, "systemic" problems that keep MUDs from flourishing:

      1) They had their day. Lots of things on the net are simply fads, which flare up, then subside and leave only a core group of remaining followers, not much bigger or even smaller than the original population.

      2) The gameplay on most MUDs isn't much different than MMORPG's: jump on the mobs that pop, loot, level, repeat. Doesn't engage the brain anyway, so why would you want to do it without any eye candy?

      3) The "pure RP" muds that are out there are often a variation of hanging out at the guildhall and kvetching.

      4) At some point in any game development, one hits a "critical resource" problem: server bandwidth, storage, and above all, artistic talent. Artists aren't into commity work like coders are, it's in fact pretty antithetical to their worldview for most of them. Whether changing the art culture to a free software ethic is the answer or not, the fact remains that good artists that can produce models, textures, character art, voice acting, writing, and music are damn expensive. The ones a project does get tend to have to make it a full-time-job to get any decent amount of art done (this tends to be true for visual artists, musicians seem to be able to do part time production work)

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    14. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All very good points. Now if only I could give you my +5...

    15. Re:Could it be because MUDs suck? by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 0

      They opensource their work the moment they post it on the web.

      VIEW -> PAGE SOURCE

  2. Mud/Moo/Muse by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was really into the Battletech muse years ago, it had decent ANSI gfx, and was rather fun over a modem. I tried to find one in service for old times sake, all the links where dead.

    But now, with all CPU/GPU power, there are good graphical type MOO's. Half the fun of MOO's where creating objects and chatting at the same time. There are a dozen opensource VR worlds on sourceforge, and some monthly subscription VR worlds that are rather fun.

    Currently I'm playing Secondlife. It's quite a improvement. Of course, I still know people who play nethack and tradewars. So the classics do stay around.

    1. Re:Mud/Moo/Muse by ghideon · · Score: 2, Informative
      On the subject of Battletech MUSEs, there are still a few running.

      btech.no-ip.com 3049

      btech.dhs.org 3030

      http://btech.sourceforge.net/ The main Source Forge site.

      Here's a historical archive of Battletech MUSE info:

      http://hpgx.net/btmuse/

      There's a few more out there running that I can't remember (like the 3056 Sim site), but 3030 is still very much alive, and the people there should be able to expand this list.

  3. Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You could ask the same about any game genre: why are the free, open-source first-person shooters lagging? The large amount of work that goes into any game means that they're not as easy to develop. Due to the time they consume, it's difficult to pay the rent if you create them as anything other than commercial, closed-source products (and sell the result).

    But don't forget that MUDS are also a dying genre. They are less popular than ever. Because of this, there are going to be fewer projects - open or closed working in the genre. MUDS need writers as the primary content authors. And good writers are not very likely to want to give their work away for free.

    Finally, if you really want an open-source MUD: make one yourself.

    1. Re:Duh. by Pyromage · · Score: 0

      > Good writers are not very likely to want to give their work away for free.

      You're wrong. That's all there is to it; it is not the case that you are right. You're wrong. That simply isn't true. ... open source software? Linux?

      You're just wrong. Plenty of skilled people in all fields give their work away.

    2. Re:Duh. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      They are not dying.

      At least in my experiance. While I don't MUD, I MUSH/MUX and one can get the same number of players and the same quality of players today as you could 7-8 years ago.

    3. Re:Duh. by ajagci · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You could ask the same about any game genre: why are the free, open-source first-person shooters lagging? The large amount of work that goes into any game means that they're not as easy to develop.

      Neither is the Linux kernel or many other open source projects. Furthermore, there are plenty of "total conversions" of existing video games that involve completely new models of everything.

      No, the reason why you don't see that stuff is cultural and sociological: the kind of people who do that sort of thing generally are not very much into open anything. Many of them come out of a shareware or "freeware" tradition that happens to be closed source and builds on commercial building blocks.

      But it's going to change over time: as open source provides better tools engines and better graphics tools, you'll see more of that energy being poured into open source games of every genre.

    4. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong. That's all there is to it

      Yes, thanks for the persuasive argument (rolls eyes).

      The problem is that Linux is a means to an end. Nobody writes an operating system for the sake of writing an operating system. They do it so that they can run applications, use it to solve problems - and not have to pay to use other people's operating systems.

      Please try to deny that the hardcore Linux kernel developers are making a living from it. Even such open-source "nobility" as ESR and Linus make money and obtain work through being open-source developers. They may not directly sell a product, but they sure do sell support, advocacy, lectures and the like. Not to mention the plethora of developers who get paid to work on Linux - I'm sure the IBM developers are well compensated for their contributions to making Linux run well on IBM's big iron.

      I'm sure the weekend coders with day-jobs make a contribution as well, but there's only so much you can do working on it 2 days a week without taking days off.

      The catch with games is that there's no point other than to play them. Making open-source games is about as fulfilling as mastubration. Nobody's going to care if the code is high quality if the games can't compete visually and thematically with the latest commercial offerings. And they often can't. People who can actually get paid for making games are doing so, leaving a very thin pool of talent for "free" projects.

      For example, the most famous completely open source game is... Tux Racer? How weak.

    5. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proportionally they are a dying genre because the games market today is far larger than it was 7 years ago. They certainly don't have any presense in the retail games market - retail text based games died a long time ago.

      You admit yourself that you've been playing the same type of game for a long time. It would suggest that the hardcore MUD population has been largely unchanged for the past decade if they've all been playing together.

      The question I should as is: how many new players do you regularly see? Because without constant growth and a healthy influx of new of players - the community will eventually decay and die as those playing age and loose interest.

      Statistical data about the average age of MUD players over the past decade would probably be able to forecast this.

    6. Re:Duh. by Sheeplet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not the truth. I'm a fan of graphical MMORPGs, don't get me wrong, but the MUD I play is doing very well. Aardwolf (www.aardmud.org) currently has an average of about 500 people connected at all times and has been running (for free actually) for the past 7 years. That's a pretty impressive record, and it doesn't seem to be slowing down. Even with MMORPGS around, there's something attractive still in text-based MUDs

      --
      -- Breaking Windows: Not just for kids anymore KDE
    7. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Furthermore, there are plenty of "total conversions" of existing video games that involve completely new models of everything.

      Yes, let me list a few of the more memorable ones:

      * Counter Strike - the most popular mod ever, a counter-terrorism mod ("modification") for the game Half-Life. The developers are now working at Valve Software, having released several commercial versions. Their follow up "Counter Strike - Condition Zero" is due on shelves next month.

      * Desert Combat - the premier mod for Battlefield 1942, voted best game mod of 2003 and 2002 by Gamespy. The team (Trauma Studios) just signed a contract worth $.5 million with DICE to develop a commercial project for a future Battlefield product.

      * Natural Selection - the #2 Half-Life mod, the Natural Selection team has formed their own studio and are looking for publishers to take Natural Selection to retail.

      * Team Fortress - the ancient Quake then Half-Life mod who's employment by Valve meant that TF1 was included with the official Half-Life patch. This project spawned the now infamous (for the wrong reasons) Team Fortress 2.

      as open source provides better tools engines and better graphics tools

      I don't see that happening. Commercial games typically take 18 months to complete. An open source project will take longer than that if it's worth playing. I can't see unpaid virtual teams sticking together for that long - it's too much effort for too little reward.

      And games are much more of an artistic endeavour than a purely technical challenge of writing an operating system where there's often a provable "best way" of doing something. Operating systems are a means to an end - games exist only for the sake of the game, hence everyone wants things to work their way. Expect infighting, splinter groups and a lot of projects not getting finished.

      Remember, open-source software is an anomaly in the world of commerce. As a rule, nobody provides work or services for free - at least, no work or services that you'd actually want.

    8. Re:Duh. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I see the same amount of new players, when the new player cycles hit, as I have for the last 5 years.

      When I say, cycles, it's been my experiance that new players come in waves during the year and there are dry spells.

      I see new players all the time, usually ages 14-36, I run an Old West MUSH, and we're kind of controlling so our player base isn't big, but most everyone I talk to see the same numbers of people coming on as they have for years.

      Theres as many players on the games I play, as were on the games I played in 94-96, and they aren't the same players.

    9. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to break it to you, but 500 players is not very many. As a percentage of online games, MUDs have undoubtedly dropped in popularity in the past 10 years.

      You've been playing for 7 years. How many of your fellow players have also been playing for 7 years? Do you have a stagnant playerbase that is not replenishing itself?

      I don't see kids flocking to MUDs in droves. Eventually you'll stop playing due to old age. As will all your other current playmates. Last one out turn off the server...

    10. Re:Duh. by Pyromage · · Score: 1

      What's so bad about masturbation? 8-}

    11. Re:Duh. by ajagci · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see that happening. Commercial games typically take 18 months to complete. An open source project will take longer than that if it's worth playing. I can't see unpaid virtual teams sticking together for that long - it's too much effort for too little reward.

      So? Many open source projects have been around for decades, not just 18 months. The ability to do development for the long haul is where open source has a huge advantage. And the different time scales are also why you are only now beginning to see open source equivalents of games like Quake: open source really is in it over the long run.

      And games are much more of an artistic endeavour than a purely technical challenge of writing an operating system where there's often a provable "best way" of doing something. Operating systems are a means to an end - games exist only for the sake of the game, hence everyone wants things to work their way. Expect infighting, splinter groups and a lot of projects not getting finished.

      I think you really misunderstand software if you think that there's a "provably 'best way'" of designing a word processor, kernel, or graphics editor.

      In any case, if the game is designed well, that kind of dynamic will improve things: competing models, competing looks, multiple interacting worlds, etc.

      In fact, there are plenty of open source games out there that are very popular and have stood the test of time. That's a lot more than can be said for many of those commercial FPS's out there.

      The only reason you see so many commercial games with no apparent OSS counterpart is because commercial vendors push the limits of what hardware can do; OSS, for various reasons, is far more conservative, but no less inventive. And in terms of actual game play, most commercial games really aren't that hot.

    12. Re:Duh. by moonbender · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, based on the page you linked to, his MUD would rank the 23nd most popular online game. :P

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    13. Re:Duh. by mrseigen · · Score: 1

      Finally, if you really want an open-source MUD: make one yourself.

      Exactly. Apparently whoever had this little rant hasn't looked beyond the popular choices for MUDs; there are literally millions of open-source MUDs available, some even with GPL!

      But hey, nothing gets in the way of being ignorant and asking other people to write code for you so you can run it without giving back to it.

    14. Re:Duh. by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 0

      In fact, there are plenty of open source games out there that are very popular and have stood the test of time. That's a lot more than can be said for many of those commercial FPS's out there.

      When you make claims like this its helpful to provide examples. Its also interesting that you compare all of one groups games versus only once genre. Arguement, failing. Straws...are all...that...are left...to grasp...

    15. Re:Duh. by ajagci · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When you make claims like this its helpful to provide examples.

      Examples? Nethack, Omega, XConq, FreeCiv, xblast, xtrek, xtb, and many others. Browse around the gaming-related USENET groups from the 1980's and 1990's. In fact, many of those wonderful commercial games you so much admire are copies (with more graphics but worse game play) of open source games.

      Of course, in absolute numbers, there aren't as many of those OSS games around--while something like nethack gets maintained for 20 years, you might get a dozen releases from a commercial gaming company, all with roughly the same gameplay but new graphics.

      Its also interesting that you compare all of one groups games versus only once genre

      Some people find the oddest things interesting.

      Arguement, failing. Straws...are all...that...are left...to grasp...

      Uh, huh. We'll see in another decade or so. I predict we'll have a rich selection of high-quality OSS games in the currently hot commerical genres. It will start off as running "total conversions" and upgraded freely released commercial game content on new OSS engines and then gradually move to entirely new content.

    16. Re:Duh. by arkanes · · Score: 1
      I'm one of the aardwolf players that's been there the whole seven years. Theres not very many. I should point out that the 500 number the OP is the number of concurrent players, not the total playerbase, which is several thousand (not sure exactly how MANY thousands...) and there has been steady, constant growth since the mud opened. While it can't match the sheer numbers the popularity of Everquest, it's doing quite well for itself.

      On the otherhand, there's not a whole lot of muds in Aardwolfs range as far as longevity or playerbase goes, so it doesn't disprove the notion that muds are dying as a percentage of online games.

    17. Re:Duh. by andreMA · · Score: 1
      When you make claims like this its helpful to provide examples
      Another example...

      TinyMUSH is currently under active albeit leisurely development. David Passmore has been involved in the project for several years, and Lydia Leong even longer. Other members of the development team are also familiar names to those who've followed such for long.

      The server is Open Source (Creative Commons Artistic License) and builds without modification on most *NIX-like systems (and I think with some effort Windows as well). I've built and run it succesfully under 2.2 and 2.4 Linux kernels and a recent version of Darwin (OS X).

  4. No, it couldn't be. by Pyromage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because MUDs are great! Sure, it's not the same as Everquest, but who said it had to be? MUDs have many advantages over graphical systems, and vice versa. They simply are not competing. What *is* happening is that the new generation of youngins' just doesn't have the mental capacity to work a MUD.

    Damned kids these days.

    1. Re:No, it couldn't be. by ajd1474 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They dont have the mental capacity or they dont know what the hell a MUD is? Way back when i started university (1995), everyone knew what a MUD was. But just like Kings Quest's text based interface was replaced with a GUI, so Text-based MUDS got replaced by graphical versions. (I still think the Original KQ was far superior to the later GUI versions btw) It's not that kids don't have the brain capacity, its just that kids go to their local mall and spend their money on the 'latest and greatest' game. Just like they'd rather watch a movie then read the book. It's about instant gratification. More reward for less effort. It's more of a reflection on society as a whole, and not so much the kids that are being brought up in it. Even i stopped playing MUD's, after spending years writing them. There's really only so much you can do before you start reinventing the wheel.

      --
      I refuse to have a sig... dammit!
    2. Re:No, it couldn't be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, hmmm perhaps it may because people prefer graphics to text, except for a few of the "nerdly elite" that love to have some reason to look down their noses at the "unwashed masses".

    3. Re:No, it couldn't be. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only advantages text MUDs had IMO was the ubiquity of the telnet protocol and the easy availability of free clients (including mud-specific ones like tintin). These days, the number of gamers playing commercial games online dwarfs the number of gamers playing telnet-based games. I am a veteran MUD coder and admin; if I wanted to create a game world today, I would use Neverwinter Nights to do it, or mod an FPS. Not only are there better tools and more options available, but there's a bigger audience.

      Textmuds are a notch above BBS door games, obsolete, their primary appeal nostalgic.

  5. Code theft is one major reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    There have been more than a few instances of MUDs taking open source codebases such as DIKU, making cosmetic alterations, removing credits and then selling in-game items for money. The most egregious example is Medievia, but there have been several others. Search the newsgroup rec.games.mud.diku if you want more information - there's a Hall of Shame, as I recall.

    The reason of course, is that the writers of these codebases tend to be college kids who do it as a hobby, and don't have the money to pursue legal action. The aforementioned Medievia is actually a huge racket, and according to some estimates they've made >$250K over the years by selling items to addicted players. See his link for more information, as well as this one.

    1. Re:Code theft is one major reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey,I used to play med,but got to dual then got bored and quit.Never knew about this stuff.Neways,that link says two gods Thranz and Oma (who I remember cos of his quests) have said that med is based on stolen code,so i think u should read it.

    2. Re:Code theft is one major reason by true_tavish · · Score: 2, Insightful

      /. is the last place I figured the "who cares if it is stolen code, it's fun!" excuse would show up. Old habits die hard I guess.

    3. Re:Code theft is one major reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The reason of course, is that the writers of these codebases tend to be college kids who do it as a hobby, and don't have the money to pursue legal action

      They sure are taking their sweet time then! Medievia hasn't used any DIKU code since 1993 and people are still complaining about it

    4. Re:Code theft is one major reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You appear to be a shill, but in the unlikely event that you're not, I urge you to read the linked sites, which have detailed code comparisons and remarks from former coders. One of the creators of DIKU (quoted on one of those pages) has stated that code theft incidents like this one were the major reason why he stopped working on free mud code bases.

    5. Re:Code theft is one major reason by Shanoyu · · Score: 2, Informative

      As the -1 replies demonstrate, Medievia is helped out greatly by people like AxL and such who manage to inspire a near universal hatred for medievians, such that, when they are discovered they are sometimes (perhaps more often than I think) told to go back from whence they came.

      The Medievia debacle demonstrates how fiercely protective coders are of code, even of code that isn't actually their own. (AxL, unless I am mistaken, has taken up a crusade on behalf of the DIKU team, not as a member of it.)

      Upwards of $250k is a rather generous estimate. It would require at /least/ 5000 purchased items be sold every year to a playerbase composed of around 1250 donating players, or roughly 4 donation items per year per person spending about $200. That isn't to say it's not profitable, it most certainly is. However, the profit is more akin to that derived from a convenience store than that of the country club it is often accused of being.

      The question of Medievia asks "Whats fair?" versus "Whats legal?" If Medievia did nothing more than cosmetic alterations, why has it persisted as a profitable online game? Certainly, it had roots in the DIKU framework and the legality of that is dubious at best. However, the licence proved neigh undefendable, whether the reasons behind that were a lack of funds to spend on trial or the relative strength of Mr. Krause's (Vryce) case, the reality is the same.

      And what good would have come if the DIKU team could have up-held their copyright? Not much. The internet would have one less service that people were willing to use and support. There would be fewer MUDs stealing Medievia's good ideas (turnabout is fair play, after all.) And undoubtedly other (supposedly "clean") muds that get away with this without the rabble rousing of people like AxL and KaVir would never have started.

      Example given: Materia Magica, formerly known as Moongate. Its sin is the exact same as Medievia's, of course AxL and the like never went after them because M.M.'s administrators learned how to obfuscate the fact from Medievia's example. Strange indeed, since a history of the admins involved in both MUDs reveals that they are, in many cases, the exact same people. This explains how Circle of Power moved their entire clan with ease between the two games before they had both developed beyond being similar games.

      So yes, it is illegal, albeit a civil crime the developers and rabble-rousers are content to let pretty much everyone else get away with. The presence of Medievia in the MUD community has had an over-all positive effect, despite the attempts of AxL and others to harm it (efforts which have done more to harm the MUD "community" at large than Medievia).

      On KaVir's Medievia licence page, he asks himself, "Who cares?" He responds to himself by saying "Many of us." I question the truth of the assertion, given the sheer apathy he and his group have for attacking "the problem" past this one mud. Given the sheer inability of most of the parties to conduct a serious discussion of the license past a flamewar or pre-written FAQ's about DIKU code, we shouldn't be amazed that nothing has come from the "debate" other than bile.

    6. Re:Code theft is one major reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'm afraid I just don't follow your line of reasoning - as another poster pointed out, the "if it's fun, it doesn't matter if it was stolen, or if it's a racket" position is morally bankrupt at the very least.

      Just FYI, I don't know anything about Axl (axl rose?) besides the post on rec.games.mud.diku, the Hall of Shame. I have contributed to CircleMUD in the past, which is why I am interested in this issue. The story asks why free MUD development has stalled - one answer, as the quote from one of the linked pages points out (where a DIKU developer states that he gave up mostly because of this very issue), is places like medievia, where the devs just take code and repackage it and sell in-game items to addicted players.

      You say that no one's followed up on other MUDs which do this and name an example. Fine, I've never heard of this other place and I'll take your word for it; there is a "hall of shame" where many games are pointed out, as I mentioned, and this should be added - post on the group please. However, this doesn't diminish the medievia case in the slightest - they are by far the most egregious offenders, as the admins have shown no remorse at all, or come forward with any sort of compromise. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, they claim their MUD doesn't have any DIKU code even when programmers from a couple of years ago (and source code) have attested otherwise. I think the logic is (and I'm not speaking for anyone besides myself here) that if enough people are aware of the issue, they can communicate this to people who play the game and the ethical ones among them will choose to leave. What other alternatives can you think of, besides expensive legal action?

      I (and I think most other reasonable people - and axl doesn't seem to be one of them) would be satisfied if medievia made a complete accounting of its monies, and did something like donate the profits (note I said profits, it does take some money to keep the game running) to charity. You really think that given what we've seen of the admins, they're going to do anything like that?

      You say 250K/yr is an excessive figure - I actually said "over the years" as in a cumulative, but your figures seem to indicate that 125K/yr is a reasonable extrapolation!

      I wouldn't care if they made a profit from a commercial codebase, although I would think it a very silly game where you could buy any item for real money (yes, I think UO is silly now that they've started doing this). On medievia, you can do exactly that (through their talismans-by-proxy program), but the very design of the game (and no "conversions" to C++ and feature additions don't change that design) comes from a codebase that was intended for the community, and not for some casual thief to profit from.

  6. Time and money by MMaestro · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Face it, today's games (mods and total conversions don't count) are no longer made in people's garages by developing teams consisting of one person. People don't have the time or money to maintain something as a video game, even one as small as a MUD. There are also other issues at hand, time spent working on the game vs time spent sleeping. Money spent on upgrading the server vs money spent on going to Europe for vacation. Social life vs virtual life. Paying job vs non-paying job. Employment vs unemployment.

    1. Re:Time and money by DrMorris · · Score: 2, Informative

      People don't have the time or money to maintain something as a video game, even one as small as a MUD.

      There are some quiet big and really complex MUDs I wouldn't call "small videogames". The core of these MUDs is mostly old and [t]rusty, but they have rich content. At least here in Germany a few big MUDs are running well and healthy, with new players signing on every day and a lot of people maintaining and enhancing these virtual worlds.

  7. A few reasons by +Majere+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One reason I think mud development is lagging, is namely that
    muds in my experience attract young players and are ran by teenagers and college student. I rarely meet players over the age of 30. This leads to inexperienced coding and less bleeding edge technology. That could be part of the problem.

    Also, muds are in competition with each other. We had short discussion about opening up the source to the mud I work on (The Northern Crossroads), and it was determined that if we opened up the source. We would lose our uniqueness among other muds. If everyone else used our features.

    Another thing, they are just games. They aren't very important on the overall realm of things, why should we be devoting tons of time and energy in keeping something alive, when its not profitable or really useful in the end.

    (Heh, not a very organized post)

    1. Re:A few reasons by Alizarin+Erythrosin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I rarely meet players over the age of 30. This leads to inexperienced coding and less bleeding edge technology. That could be part of the problem.

      I'm one of the head coders for the mud I play on (advanced over the years). I'm 22, and started coding for them when I was 19. I'll admit if you compare code quality now and then, I've vastly improved over the years (not to say I was any slouch or anything back then, but my technique has improved since). We strive to have good features, and I've worked on some of the biggest enhancements that have made over the 8 or so years this mud has been running in its current iteration.

      But I agree with your other points. Opening the source has been discussed, but the person who runs the place is pretty paranoid about the source (it was stolen before by a former coder, and she brought legal action). I had to wait a year or so and code on bits and pieces of files only related to my code before I actually got the entire thing.

      Sometimes players complain about stuff, and how we sometimes get behind on code or new features. I tell them that I do it for free, for the love of the code. Sometimes live gets in the way.

      --
      There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
  8. Could it be... by rixstep · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why Is Free MUD Development Lagging?

    Could it be because there's not a lot you can do once you've succeeded in mixing Wet Application Terminal Entry Responses with Dusty Iterative Response Technology?

  9. Muds still have one advantage by Sogol · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are the only games that you can play discreetly at work.

  10. Not all MUDS are dying by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I still play Dragonrealms, and I've been a player since it was free on AOL. They charge the same as much graphical MMORPGs, and the gameplay is astounding. They CONSTANTLY implement new, well-balanced game systems. The world is large, plenty of people, and for some reason, there is a dearth of fucktards to screw up the game.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Not all MUDS are dying by GebsBeard · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'll throw in the obligatory plug for GemStone III - now GemStone IV I believe. I am not a Simutronics employee nor have I ever been one. While people have complained about Simutronics' customer policies from time to time there is no denying the mystique of the game. That thing is a bottomless morass of a world, step wrong and you'll sink in and be lost forever. I got hooked on GS III when they started on GEnie (circa 1990) and only bailed when the addiction kicked in and credit card meltdown occurred (for me this was about $350 in charges one month).

      The text MUD genre as a open-source hobby may be dying but as a commercial venture they are still completely viable. GemStone is still going strong after 14 years; your average graphical MMORPG is obsolete in 3 to 4 years, being generous.

    2. Re:Not all MUDS are dying by Ieshan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I played dragonrealms for a long time. You might recognize the name.

      It was a lot of fun while it lasted, and had some great systems that no other game has come close to mimicking. Their combat / magic systems were very impressive. But leveling was a chore.

      No, really. Once you've reached a certain level, it became no more fun to level. Everything was just X creature with new name, in Y area. Roleplaying is much more fun in small groups with a DM: There's no need to keep up the insanely serious air without some breathing room to just have fun, and often, major events happened without you.

      I contributed a lot to the game in terms of player content (I hear many of the G'nar Peth stuff which a few of us started is still going on), and lets face it, I had a lot of fun doing it. But overall, the game is a whole lot less rewarding than something which lets you be a character in a social situation: real life.

      I mean, if the point of the game you're playing really is social interaction, why don't you just go interact socially?

  11. Dark and shattered lands (dsl) is another one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject, but yeah the license could be a little clearer.Still,clear enough that code theft can't be excused by ignorance.

  12. LambdaMOO by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
    I never really read the license, but isn't the LambdaMOO server at least open-source? I know that it hasn't really changed much in the past five years... Also, has anyone in here ever looked at ColdC? It's a fascinating open-source (IIRC) object-oriented system, even if its default core is abysmally documented and mildly confusing ;) Would anything like this fit the bill?

    Postscript: I have been looking at ColdC and can't find the stinking license anywhere. Maybe it's not open-source after all. Bah. And LambdaMOO I think has some wierd Xeorox thing, but I think it's sort-of-free....

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:LambdaMOO by endx7 · · Score: 2, Informative
      An example copyright heading for LambdaMOO:
      Copyright (c) 1995, 1996 Xerox Corporation. All rights reserved.
      Portions of this code were written by Stephen White, aka ghond.
      Use and copying of this software and preparation of derivative works based
      upon this software are permitted. Any distribution of this software or
      derivative works must comply with all applicable United States export
      control laws. This software is made available AS IS, and Xerox Corporation
      makes no warranty about the software, its performance or its conformity to
      any specification. Any person obtaining a copy of this software is requested
      to send their name and post office or electronic mail address to:
      Pavel Curtis
      Xerox PARC
      3333 Coyote Hill Rd.
      Palo Alto, CA 94304
      Pavel@Xerox.Com
      (It isn't quite formatted correctly, but it'll do....)

      Anyhow, the Xerox thing is that Xerox owns the code (Pavel Curtis wrote most of it while under the employ of Xerox)

    2. Re:LambdaMOO by rplacd · · Score: 1

      True, but LambdaMOO's server code is now hosted on SourceForge. I think they require some sort of open source license for all hosted projects.

      The LambdaMOO admins occasionally make dumps of the live Lambda database and give away the core bits.

    3. Re:LambdaMOO by endx7 · · Score: 1

      True, but LambdaMOO's server code is now hosted on SourceForge. I think they require some sort of open source license for all hosted projects.

      Yes. And I believe that this is pretty much considered an open source license because it allows changes and redistribution. The only issue is that he wants you to send him your name and address (which can be a good idea, like for example if some massively horrible bug is found).

      The LambdaMOO admins occasionally make dumps of the live Lambda database and give away the core bits.

      I think that last time that has happened was 1999. There are other more recent third party cores, which are generally based of off LambdaCore.

  13. MUDs aren't necessarily suited to be open source by Illusion · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm a staunch advocate of open source -- almost everything else I write is GPLed -- and yet the MUD I've been running for 9 years isn't open source. We don't use anyone elses code or world, and we don't share ours.

    Mostly, I wish there were fewer MUDs. 99% of what is out there is the result of someone with little or no skill grabbing a copy of an open-source MUD, adding a few hundred poorly-written rooms to the world, changing the code just enough to make it crash hourly, and then advertising on Mudconnector or similar. Will these people have anything at all to contribute back to an open source project? No. They do, however, succeed in cheapening the experience that the average user has when connecting to something running that code.

    -- Aaron

    --

    Aaron

  14. GPL worries by Tyreth · · Score: 4, Interesting
    MUD servers, unfortunately, break the usefulness of the GPL on a technicality. You can simply run a MUD server at home and let other people connect to it. That means you're not giving away a binary of your MUD server. The GPL only requires you to give source to the same people you give a binary to. You never have to give away a binary, so you never give away source. The GPL's intended purpose is foiled.

    I've had thoughts about this at one time or another. What happens if/when services for most people are done remotely. Thin clients, applications over internet, and so on? This may be the future of computing for most people, and the GPL doesn't cover it.

    1. Re:GPL worries by bishiraver · · Score: 1

      Which is why you make the binary available, but not your content.

      This is like apache making their binaries available, but not the content of their website. The key to making a decent wide-spread binary for a MUD is to allow most of the in-game systems to be changed via -scripts- - so you can change a DnD style MUD to a, for example, GURPs, style MUD.. without changing the actual binary, just some entries in a text file (probably a few equations in a script, too) somewhere.

      The point would be to have a stable core engine, with the game systems (combat, advancement) user defined. Distribute it with a sample game system that shows how robust the scripting is, along with a stable server engine, and you've got a pretty good candidate for a GPL'd MUD.

    2. Re:GPL worries by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      The ASP (Application Service Provider, not Active Server Page) problem with respect to the GPL has been discussed many times. I don't believe it's ever been resolved -- I suspect that eventually, someone will abuse it far enough and people will get peeved and Stallman will come up with something clever for GPLv3.

  15. Opensource could finish muds off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The current system that is generally used to develop a new mud (download codebase, add new features/content, open to public) works much better than opensourcing every mud out there would. MUD's can't work without players. Stock muds are doomed to fail, the playerbase is too saturated.
    In order for a mud to succeed, it needs to have something that the other 500 muds based on the same codebase don't have. If a MUD were to give away it's innovations, then 10 clones would spring up overnight. Eventually the playerbase would dwindle as the players moved from one clone to the next, and all 10 would fail. The opensource model is great, but it doesn't apply to everything.

  16. Personal Opionon of MUD games by jnguy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I personally don't like MUD, rpgs or anything that takes too long. However, is it really hard to see why MUD games aren't doing that well. Sure, to some people they are really addictive, but there is no longer a reason to go text based. Most PDAs can do things far beyond your MUD game. A good star wars MUD that I played for a while is www.dforces.com. If you look around, there are quite a few MUD games out there.

  17. Random thoughts from an occasional MUD coder. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    I do some occasional development work on Shattered World -- in-game, not game driver, that is. These are some random thoughts that I have on MUDs and the problems they face that aren't faced by other development projects:
    1. Game balance. It's very easy to code up a wham-blam-thank-you-ma'am sword that kills the toughest dragons in an instant. It's also very easy to kill the fun of the game by doing just that. There are a lot of subtle interactions that can come in and surprise you. Case in point: a certain quest (courtesy of a now-defunct MUD, which I ported to Shattered) uses a bottle to get the questor into a particular room, where a critical item is obtained. Unfortunately, that bottle could be used elsewhere in the game to obtain a bit of breathing space for healing and suchlike against tougher monsters. This was solved by letting you get in the bottle wherever you liked, but out of the bottle only in areas related to the quest the bottle was created for. (Yes, it's an ugly, cheap hack.)
    2. The game code, or "mudlib". Parts of this are generic (or could be): the code for logging in; the basic room object; the basic monster object; the basic weapon object; a base poison; wearable items; shops; etc. Other parts are specific to the game: town design, quests, guilds, and so on. Splitting these two parts, unless you're scrupulous about it from the start, is very tedious and annoying. Even if you're scrupulous at the start, it's very easy for code to wander off in random directions if you don't keep a tight check on it.
    3. Copyright and originality. It's very easy to copy ideas (and there are several cases on the 'Net of ideas popping up in other MUDs a few days or weeks after appearing in Shattered). It's a lot harder to come up with something original and fun.
    Those are ones that spring up off the top of my head. Game balance, in particular, is a tricky one. Once a game-unbalancing item is out there, it can be tricky to recall, and it can be even harder to undo the damage it causes. Most of the time, we end up settling for just putting paid to the more blatent abuses of the system, and punishing (in-game, eg: by random deaths) abusing players.

    The other thing is, running a MUD is inherently political. There will always be morons out to spoil everybody else's fun; there will always be people who disagree (for whatever reason) with your view of things. Working on back-end code (logins, building blocks -- like the base room, base monster, etc) is very tedious without the chance to do something a bit more visible. Unless you really love it, you're liable to get burnt out relatively quickly.

    And finally: the time factor. I have a lot less time to code than I used to, and my useful output on Shattered has dropped over the past year or two. This is partly a function of growing older, and is one of the reasons why, as other posters have said, you tend to get teenagers and suchlike in MUD development.

    Speaking of the admin side of things, it's getting harder to attract new players. Partly that's due to the MMORPG syndrome -- people like to see pretty graphics, and MUDs take a bit more effort to understand, since you're just reading text -- and it's also partly because people just don't understand that the 'Net is more than just email and the WWW. But then, Shattered isn't in this game to have a massive player base online all the time (although it'd be nice!)

    But, when all is said and done, the kick I get in seeing players exploring, for the first time, a new quest that I've just put in makes up for a lot of that. There's also a reasonable amount of social interaction, both for the players, and for the admins.

    Anyway -- I'm rambling, and I need to get back to work. As I said -- just random thoughts.

    1. Re:Random thoughts from an occasional MUD coder. by gangien · · Score: 1

      Good lord have you hit the nail on the head with number 1. most MUD suck because they are too difficult and end up being to lopsided, IMO. Something we've tried pretty carefully to avoid is am unbalanced MUD. But man it's difficult, plus the players never seem to understand why you downgraded latest-spell to do less damage.

      The other thing is, running a MUD is inherently political. There will always be morons out to spoil everybody else's fun; there will always be people who disagree (for whatever reason) with your view of things. Working on back-end code (logins, building blocks -- like the base room, base monster, etc) is very tedious without the chance to do something a bit more visible. Unless you really love it, you're liable to get burnt out relatively quickly.

      Another great point. I suppose the harsh reality is anything that has any sort of structure that involves people is political. But they are every present in MUDs that have active players.

  18. With a Grain of Salt by true_tavish · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I would expect no less from Skotos to publish an article foretelling the downfall of the free game community. Where will all the gamers turn to now in order to fill their desires? Free MUDs continue to thrive and are still creating new and innovative designs. The problem is there are just so many new games out there that do rely upon pre-existing code, it is hard to find those on the leading edge.

    Amazingly enough a large percentage of the MUDers I run across are from the age group that is supposedly too graphically oriented to play text-based games. The allure of free, fun, and gaming still seems to hold some drawing power after all. Especially considering that word of mouth and the occasional banner on niche sites is the sum total of advertising for the games.

    1. Re:With a Grain of Salt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can tell you that Skotos didn't ask that article to be written that way, as a "doom and gloom -- you must turn to Skotos!" deal. I can say that with certainty because, y'know, I'm the author.

      I *do* maintain an open source (public domain, actually) mud library, so what I'm saying isn't all whining for somebody else to do it.

      But yes, *do* take it with a grain of salt. It's a Skotos article, but it's really only my personal observations and opinions.

      -- Noah Gibbs aka angelbob

  19. Re:MUDs aren't necessarily suited to be open sourc by gangien · · Score: 1

    I personally aggree for the msot part. I Code for a mud that's been up now since 98 (No cheap plug, you can find it easily enough if you want it) and most muds out there are startups by people who spend a couple weeks figuring out how to setup a mud then do a bit of dabbling in building/coding it up then it pretty much just sits. Problem isn't so much that they do this than it is that they usually take other mudders with them and for the most part the people involved get bored of mudding and go on to other things. As parent said they get a cheapened experience.

    But at the same time our mud is derrived from SMAUG So it's not all bad either ;)

  20. MUDs as a genre are not dying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... although there may be fewer in the future.
    but also adventures have been reputed to be dead some years ago, but now a flood of new titles reaches the market.
    the advantages of MUDs (usually free, playable with even the oldest machine and a 14.4 k modem, playable discreetly from work) will always attract some people..
    i am a coder in a MUD myself, that has been open for over 6 years now, we have a solid base of players and there always logging on new ones (and some even stay for a loooooong time).
    I think, its the same as with books: although there is radio, cinema and tv, books are still a big part of our daily life...

    www.evermore.de ( :o) )

  21. Some thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Where should I begin?

    I recently resigned from my position in the management of a very large free-as-in-beer mud. I will not go into details or even mention the mud's name/genre or my alias. However, I would like to share some of my thoughts on MUDs. Please forgive the rambling style of this post, and please forgive me for posting as AC.

    Mud developer coding style

    In a mud there are typically no formal code reviews or automated regression tests. Testing is done by the players, and often even the most disciplined coder can be reduced to the mindset of "if it doesn't crash, it's not broken." This philosophy typically leads to ugly spaghetti code, and that's really not something most people want to show off or publish for public scrutiny. A lot of the coding done for a mud is in the form of one-time hacks. Personally I'm embarrased by some of the hacks I've made. :(

    Open source and muds

    Mud developers don't release their source code for various reasons including coder pride (see above), fears about the competition stealing features and a desire to keep the players from finding cheats/exploits by reading the source. Open source is primarily useful when the end user needs to be able to modify his/her personal copy of an application. However as other posters have mentioned, MUDs are run on the admin's server. Users only interact with the game via established web protocols, so asking a game to release its source code is actually like asking Google to show us its private OS and file system.

    What is a mud?

    From two steps sideways, the mud experience is really a lot like a shell account on a unix box. You connect via telnet/ssh and issue single-line commands to interact with the game. Moving from room to room is *a lot* like changing directories, and most of the other commands could actually be implemented with shell scripts. The more interactive features like combat and responsive NPCs would require a bit more glue, so you would probably have to modify the shell for those.

    Taking two steps back, we see a user database with at least rudimentary access control, an extensible command parsing mechanism, a scripting language, a database for game content, a combat framework and means of processing user events. Note: Admins will likely want tools to modify the scripts and database content, a means of generating various game stats and some mechanisms for dealing with trouble users.

    What parts of a mud should be private/unique?

    For obvious reasons, the user database should be private. The content database also clearly belongs to the mud. This includes textual descriptions, vital statistics and special behaviors of all the objects, NPCs, rooms, custom quests and scripts.

    So what does that leave for open source?

    It excludes all of the content and leaves all of the framework -- the stuff that's generic enough for use in any MUD. If you're just looking for an open-source framework, check out Sourceforge. It looks like there are a few active mud projects there. I plan to post my framework there when it's done (don't hold your breath; I'm stalled at the point of only having a server, a command parser and a custom scripting language).

    Some final thoughts

    If you're looking for a complete open source game, you're probably confusing mudding with FPS or RTS games. Mud designers put in a lot of work to ensure consistency in the game. While we may be willing to give you a framework, you're on your own when it comes to the content.

    1. Re:Some thoughts by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The content database also clearly belongs to the mud. This includes textual descriptions, vital statistics and special behaviors of all the objects, NPCs, rooms, custom quests and scripts.

      That's actually one point that I find kind of sad.

      Yes, in an ideal world, every MUD would be unique. However, there's also something to be said for having a generic "elf" (or even "Tolkien elf") that people keep improving and working on, and can be used to accelerate building in new MUDs.

      I've seen a number of MUDs go belly-up, and inevitably, all that content that the MUD admins guarded carefully to keep anyone from stealing it gets lost, gone forever. Had the content been around, a player could have carried on the torch, and the MUD would not have died. I still miss the wild ChibaMOO that I once wandered around in for a few weeks, and I wish that there was some way that I could do so again -- but all that content is long gone.

      Obviously, folks should be able to do what they want to do with content. If they don't want to share it, that's their perogative. However, it is kind of sad how few people choose to share their mobs/items/rooms for, say, a Circle-based MUD.

      If you still think that shared content wouldn't benefit anyone, consider what the existence of public libraries has done for the interactive fiction community.

      Some other MUD-related thoughts:

      * Most MUDs are very, very, very simplistic compared to interactive fiction, and follow roughly diku-like commands. The parser and the degree of description and object interaction in an IF game is far, far greater than that of a MUD. I think that the ability to get a nice set of generic objects (come on, there are nice tweaks that you can make, but a game that includes a Louisville Slugger has an item that's pretty much a Lousiville Slugger).

      * MUD codebases started out a long time ago. You called them "hackish". I think I'd call them "not as amenable to modular features as they could be". Furthermore, most code is old-style C. MUDs are, IMHO, a good place to use higher level languages than C -- they do not have high CPU requirements, and do undergo frequent development. I do wish that there was a better alternative than Java, as Java is (again, IMHO) too RAM-hungry for effective MUD use.

      * The fighting system in most MUDs is still quite simplistic. This is the area of greatest improvement of most MUDs (since it was the most lacking part of the original diku system, and most derivatives with improvements have not shared their changes). Unfortunately, most coders do not share changes, so there *is* no common set of, say, martial-arts related features.

      * Color. ANSI was not an original diku feature, and because of that, color customizability is patchy among many MUDs.

      * Non-combative solutions to problems. MUDs have traditionally focused on long, not uncommonly boring hack-and-slash. Good IF games or Dungeons and Dragons games generally have a number of non-combat solutions to problems. Fallout or Neverwinter Nights frequently have non-combat solutions (or at least multiple solutions to problems). Diku didn't do it, so nobody does it.

      * MUD security is still poor. Almost all MUDs are still accessed via telnet, including a plain-text password. Why not SSH (particularly given the compression features in it, which would help modem players everywhere)? Sure, it's not as bad as exposing a shell account, but it's not great. Again, none of the standard open source codebases support SSH, so no MUDs do.

      I'd be curious as to whether there are any MUDs that expose their entire codebase and roomset via CVS (well, given today's articles, maybe SVN :-) ). I really think that there are a lot of features that folks would make good use of if made available.

      Finally, I think that a lack of open-source and open-content MUDs leads to a good deal of fragmentation. There are many half-done MUD frameworks out there, instead of one or two actively developed and featureful MUDs.

    2. Re:Some thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been thinking about your post, and I'd like to reply to each of your points, but I'm going to limit my response to sharing objects for now.

      Sharing objects between muds

      First of all I think our concept of generic items is a bit different. For me, the generic part of an item is the item's description, essential statistics like size, mass and qualitative properties like "wooden" or "metal". However, it sounds like your idea of generic items also includes combat-implementation-specific data like damage and ability to hit/block/etc.

      I agree it would be nice for newbie admins if the generic items contained combat-specific data, but let me play devil's advocate here and suggest that having such data presupposes the existence of a standardized combat system. Let me continue by saying that I believe many MUDs are created out of a desire to customize the combat system (among other things) to meet the "grand vision" of the particular MUD admin.

      So if you follow me on this line of thought, you might agree that the typical "established" mud is not compatable with a hypothetical standardized combat system; and therefore the combat meta-data has no place on a generic object. And if the generic object template doesn't include combat data, then it's really not of much use to a MUD designer (though a MUSH designer may still find it somewhat useful), so I'm not sure it's worth the effort.

      Conclusion

      I agree with you in principle. I'm basically trying point out that sharing content isn't as simple as it sounds. Clearly this ties in with a lack of standards, though in this case it's a lack of designer-interface standards instead of lack of user interface standards (like ansi colors). And until we have a really good open source engine, I'm not sure that sharing objects will be reasonable possibility.

  22. MUDs and MMORPGs: the word and the image by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MUDs are a dying genre. They are swiftly being replaced MMPORGS.

    Perhaps in market share, but the player base seems to be roughly constant (though I really wouldn't notice anything short of an order-of-magnitude shift in some direction).

    The whole text-based game industry is being replaced, or has been replaced, by games with visuals because there is no good reason to restrict gameplay to text-only when you can spruce it up with immersive graphical environments.

    Perhaps in theory, but there are a number of good reasons I can think of. The big one, the fact that the client interface is simple, is a huge deal. It means:

    * MUD clients have a simple protocol -- the same text that you're looking at on-screen. It's *very* easy for players to customize clients to fit a given MUD's protocol (via triggers or regexes on prompts). There is no standard GUI MUD client. Such a thing is not impossible (and ever since VRML fell on it's face I've been wondering who's going to try next). I guess it'd be something like Neal Stephenson's Metaverse. Worldforge is one effort, but it seems far too ambitious to ever usefully come to fruition -- it's been six years in the making, and it's still not ready.

    * Lightweight clients. Most games, even in this day and age, *still* suck down all the CPU time on a computer, and make no effort to avoid doing so. Some of this is because OSes provide crummy latency on sleep functions, some of it is because there's little reason to do so. If I'm compiling XFree86 in the background, I can play a MUD in the background without worrying about the CPU usage. Not true of Neverwinter Nights or Jagged Alliance 2 or really any other game on my computer that I can think of. Most games don't do this.

    * Very powerful, mature clients. There are excellent MUD clients out there. They have triggers, aliases, macros, etc. It's much harder and less obvious how to do this with a GUI environment. This is the same problem that GUI and TUI apps face -- the reason all the "real" programs that a UNIX guru uses are text-based is because the text-based programs have a very powerful, simple way to tie the two together. After more than two decades of GUIs, we *still* do not have good, universal GUI scripting and user-controllable IPC mechanisms on the degree of the simple pipe that the TUI provides.

    * Unobtrusiveness. It's easy to snap a MUD window into the background for a moment while chatting on ICQ or web browsing or something similar. Most 3d MMORPGs have, in the name of "immersiveness", made it standard to take over the entire display.

    * Easier creation. If you took a look at all the MUDs, rooms, worlds, and mobs out there, you'd be amazed at the sheer amount of content. It's easy for anyone that can write and has a bit of imagination to sit down and make a MUD world. It's much harder to be a good skinner and modeler. I can write a description of a green-haired female elf wearing a green silk gown and with a burnished bronze waistband that glows red. I can certainly not skin and model one, not without expending many, many times as much time and effort. Hence, there is just *more content* out there for MUDs.

    * Better handling of text. There is a lot of text in MUDs, and a fair amount in MMORPGs. I can read text in my scrollback-buffer-ized MUD client much more easily than I can with little bits of text floating in the air over character's heads.

    * Spatial distance is a function of gameplay-related meaningfulness. In an MMORPG, I may walk for a minute to cover some random, boring green hill. In a MUD (or an TUI IF game), I may walk ten feet each step if I'm in a detailed city full of things to do, and cover ten miles if I'm in the countryside. The boring and the mundane are naturally filtered out.

    * Natural logging. It's easy to keep a complete log (not just of messages) in a MUD. It's much harder to do so with a MMORPG.

    * MUDs do a better job of completely taking advantage of their medium

    1. Re:MUDs and MMORPGs: the word and the image by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      That's the best defense of MUDs I have ever read..

      Care to name a few you like? I'm just curious.

  23. Stormgate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    telnet://stormgate.dyndns.org:2345

  24. I'm more dedicated to my mud than most games... by Phoenixhunter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What I enjoy the most about MUD's (or at least the mud I participate in) is the strong connection between the developers and the players. I'm fairly stingey with my money but I know I'd give as much as I could financially do so if my MUD needed additional funding for bandwidth/hardware. With 150+ players on at any given time in a 30,000+ room Mud there is plenty to explore and quite a few guild dynamics to keep things spiced up.

  25. Maybe it depends on the MU* type by Akari-san · · Score: 1

    MUCK is a codebase that forked off of one of the old MUD trees several years back, starting with TinyMUD->TinyMUCK->today's varieties of MUCK code.

    MUCK code continues to grow in the forms of FBMuck and ProtoMUCK. While MUCKs are typically used for more free-form RP (no automated monsters to hack), their scripting languages are powerful enough to code up a complete MUD if one actually wanted. I'm aware of a couple such MUCK/MUD projects that've been worked on.

    With the above projects, advances like web-server capabilities and such are always being implemented. We've tried sending pictures (.gifs/.jpgs), but that never really caught on with the players and required unique clients to support it.

    But in the end, every game in a text-only environment is going to come down exchanging text between some kind of MU* server and some kind of user-end client. I'm not really sure how that experience would be changed at the core.

    -Akari