Member Discussions

Hey everybody,

It's been awhile since I've frequented this community, but here I am and I'm back. I've been feeling nostalgic about my teenage years and I've decided to create a new MUD again. :-)

I was young when I was an active member of the community. My time frames could be completely wrong, but I believe I got in when I was 13 and finally moved on when I was 17. Those formative years of mine directed me to where I am in life today and I owe it all to ROM.

I played a ROM derivative that only ever had a few active players at any given moment for a few months until I became obsessed with running my own MUD. I spent four or five hours with a kind developer who walked me through setting up an environment and build chain when I didn't even know what a compiler was. I spent the next year or so learning C until I felt comfortable with it enough and created a pretty advanced Envy derivative when I was maybe 14 (the source code of which I've unfortunately lost long ago).

There were discussions I've had with KaVir (the guy behind Godwars and Godwars II...I wish I knew what happened to GWII) on here under a different name that I don't want to say (I was a very excitable kid). Heck, I remember even chatting up one of the guys behind Envy before his email address didn't work anymore. I remember GreedMud, a MUD that in a lot of ways was similar to the derivative I created. Then there was NiMUD and that guy Locke...is he still a taboo subject around here?

Well, anyway, around the time I was 15 I started a C++ mud that (for me anyway) was really gratifying and I got so far as being ready to implement some form of online building. I kept the source code to that one! (Please don't judge. I was 15 when I started this and my knowledge of OO and patterns was embarrassing. If anybody wants to fork and refactor it using a more sane object hierarchy be my guest!) <http://github.com/devinus/kaolin/tree/master>

So I grew up, became the co-founder/president of my high school's CS club, did the college thing, and now I'm a very successful web developer.

So I have to ask... WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE STILL USING C CODEBASES!? I understand the nostalgia of Diku/Merc/Envy/ROM/Smaug/Godwars/whatever, but it's 2009... I mean, you guys could implement everything that any of those have in a dynamic language like Python or Ruby within a week, and yet every new mud I've seen posted here are all using MOO/MUCK/MUD codebases from '95 or '98... You guys seriously don't have to still be using C/C++...

I wish I knew what happened to GWII)

KaVir still regularly posts on this site and is still running GW II.

telnet://godwars2.org:3000

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE STILL USING C CODEBASES!?

Because they're better supported, and because well, they work. Why reinvent the wheel when C still works?

I mean, you guys could implement everything that any of those have in a dynamic language like Python or Ruby within a week

That's a gross exaggeration. They could certainly all be rewritten in Python or Ruby but the process for most would be closer to several months than a week.

If you can translate roughly five lines of code per minute from C to Ruby you'd still be looking at something like 12-13 days of 24/7 coding for most of the codebases.

So I have to ask... WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE STILL USING C CODEBASES!?

In addition to Drizzt's reasons, there's also the issue of legacy. Lots of people have MUDs which are already written in C. Changing codebases 5+ years into a project isn't an option.

Codebases in better* languages do exist. CoffeeMUD is written in Java. There are at least 2 (whose names elude me) written in Python, plus one which is barebones. Another barebones codebase is written in Ruby. I've seen others with PHP/Perl/Python/Ruby interpreters for scripting, too.

It's just... they don't have mainstream support across the board. It's the same problem with Windows**. It's pervasive enough now that it doesn't matter how much better (or worse, or just plain different) the alternatives are, because the users want what they're familiar with and the administrators want what they've always had and built on.

It'll be this way for a while, I'm afraid. If you're starting new, pick something different you like better, or roll your own.

* For sufficiently 1337 forms of "better"
** Yes. I can be "that guy" sometimes. I use linux. What can I say?

Best of Luck,
-Jess

There are many new mud software packages written in other languages, but most of them are still classic MUD or MUSH.

http://www.nimud.org

As I'm sure you know, the above codebase violates the Diku (and possibly GPL) licenses.

I'd suggest CoffeeMUD (Java), RocketMUD (barebones Ruby), TeensyMUD (barebones Ruby). I can't find the other Python MUDs immediately.

There's also GrailMUD (Python/C) and NakedMUD (barebones C/Python)

And here is a list of others.

If you're going to roll your own from Python, give the Twisted framework a look.

Best of Luck,
-Jess

Also Dead Souls 2 is written in LPC.

-Crat

Yeah, I was planning on using either Twisted, Kamaelia, or pyev for asynchronicity. One of the few unique ideas I have for the engine right now is using V8 on Python (JavaScript) for scripting NPC's and the world in general.

Another idea I had was abstracting the transfer protocol interface so players can connect through both telnet or an AJAX client written using SproutCore/Cappuccino that I can write and bundle as a standalone browser app (maybe using Fluid with a regular HTTP interface with regular HTTP compression instead of MCCP).

I'm still trying to brainstorm what an MVC architecture would resemble for a MUD. Using Mako templates, SQLAlchemy, and a custom written controller interface would be hot, but I'm not sure how much I want to make this resemble your standard MVC web app, and I'm also not sure how much I want to use SQL. I like grailmud's idea of using an object database like Durus or ZODB, but I think it would be equally as cool to use YAML or JSON to describe the world or even using a document database backend like CouchDB.

I'm not even sure yet that I want to use Python as I have just as much background in Ruby. Another novel idea would be to use Erlang, but I see no reason why a MUD needs to support a million simultaneous users...

lawl I got BINGO just halfway into your post. What do I win?

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Yeah, sorry about that. I thought I was going a little bit off the deep end, but it's just that I work with these technologies everyday and they're the most familiar way I can convey my ideas. :-)

> WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE STILL USING C CODEBASES!?

It would take a fair amount of time and effort to translate my 395913 lines of stable code into another language - particularly as I've got 14 years experience with C and 10 years with C++, but have never touched Ruby or Python.

So I'd have to weigh that up against the possible benefits - eg, would translating the code improve the gameplay for the players? Would it lower my hosting costs by reducing the cpu and memory usage? Would it increase the availability of development tools and support? That sort of thing.

It's possible I may embed another language in my mud (for scripting purposes) at some point, but I can't see myself rewriting the existing code.

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU PEOPLE STILL USING C CODEBASES!?



I'll never get over my first impression of C when it was being compared to "newer and more modern" languages of '97. An older programming gent, having spent years with it, coined it something like... "A figure-skating ballet with everyone carrying razorblades".

And it took me some time to familiarize myself and understand what that meant, but it's that memory that will keep me with C for quite some time. Sure, newer programming languages can do more in less time and any hardware-efficient elegance is no longer 'as necessary', but for personal hobby's sake, I'm happy with my choice. :)

Cratylus:

lawl I got BINGO just halfway into your post. What do I win?

I demand to see your card! I had one space left to win on each of four different lines. You clearly cheated...

I see the most promise in your idea for writing an AJAX client and using yaml or json for saving. In fact speaking of yaml someone ported Tyche's ruby mud to Python, as punymud. Anyway I like the AJAX/json idea because you could then neatly write a hybrid browser/mud game, with a rtt/rts in the browser and rpg in the mud.

Well, I actually planned to use Comet and the Bayeux protocol so the mud server could send up to the browser that new information is available (in the form of scrolling text). :-)

I have some Python MUD examples, if you're interested. I did a
lot of work on one awhile back you could maybe use.

-Kuros

just to clarify for anyone else, Comet and Bayeux use AJAX/json.

Much like people demand to stay a specific political party, or demand to have a specific brand of car, even 20 years later, is similar to Muds. Some people love Rom feel and looks. Some Circle, some prefer specific Muds in general...

You have to consider the vast majority of Muds out there are small startup Muds with very amateur coders who have never tried to code before. Consider 90%+ have to be incompetent right now at coding a Mud from the ground up, there's you explanation on why so many Muds are stock code bases, with maybe MINOR edits.

That said, Muds are also fading. Why spend so much time on a new Mud when the interest level is down?

-Unless you can offer astounding gameplay options compared to others Muds, why move?

-Back in 1995, C was/is still a stable system, and Linux was considered the only stable option. With interest levels down (look at what used to be, say in 2002 or so, several hundred posts on any given Mud forum... and today, there are several hundred posts PER YEAR). Momentum is not in the favor of new Muds. Demand is down.

---------------------

I'm probably a minority here, but I'm a hobbyist like most others. I walked in knowing plenty of VB6, and hooked up a Linux box and started looking at Rom2.4. I didn't know much C, nor Linux, so I was turned off for about two weeks. Noticing how I didn't want to be 'another modified stock', I started a blank project from the ground up.

Granted it's not done, and far from anything presentable. However, I have had visitors with interest come in before, and harass me about how I'm just using Rom2.4 and calling it my own. I come from a heavily modified Rom Mud... so I style it after that fact. But the point is, it's written in VB6, very fast and stable, and looks like a C version of Rom2.4.

So the question becomes, what does the code-base matter if the user can't tell any difference? None. It's about game play, not exact code.


There are many fine musicians in the world. There are far more bad ones, saturating the lands - this could make one believe that there are no good musicians out there - but there are. Same with Muds. You just have to do some weeding.

(Comment added by Dratgard on Tue Jul 7 12:00:07 2009)

I suppose I should clarify. My project is written in VB6, built for two servers (one to handle connections, one to handle the world AI and math). I won't explain why, I just wanted to do it this way and had reasons to.

I don't have any other Mud project codes available to read, so it's certainly not derived code, and it's certainly not in C.

(I also don't like arguments about C vs VB6. Been down that road. When users log on and say it has to be C because they can't see a difference, the debate ends there, and is why the codebase issue doesn't matter)

Porting already running mud indeed will be a bitch, but you will benefit with a lot faster development of future changes (also it's easier to find willing programmers for more modern languages like python than C).
I like to think about this as investment, sure it will take a lot of time to port it at first, but over time you will benefit from it.

> So the question becomes, what does the code-base matter if
> the user can't tell any difference? None. It's about game
> play, not exact code.

But that raises another question: Why bother spending all that time and effort creating a mud from scratch if it ends up being indistinguishable from stock ROM?

You made some comments earlier about "very amateur coders", saying that 90%+ are too "incompetent" to create a mud from the ground up. But before you sneer at them any further, perhaps you should consider that design skills are just as important as coding skills if you're trying to create a quality game that'll stand out from the competition.

Why bother spending all that time and effort creating a mud from scratch if it ends up being indistinguishable from stock ROM?

Why bother Mudding at all? Why spend hundreds of hours playing games?

In terms of indistinguishable, follow the topic a little closer: You can write the same game in C, Python, VB, whatever - why? Because to the user you may not see anything different (hypothetically if you chose a different language over another at the beginning)

You made some comments earlier about "very amateur coders", saying that 90%+ are too "incompetent" to create a mud from the ground up. But before you sneer at them any further, perhaps you should consider that design skills are just as important as coding skills if you're trying to create a quality game that'll stand out from the competition.

Ahh yes. You would also benefit from:

-Design skills
-Management skills
-Grammar skills
-Creativity/Art


But, since the topic is code and languages, I'm not sure why any of this matters to the thread.

We're now discussing Apples when we were talking about Oranges.

> In terms of indistinguishable, follow the topic a little
> closer: You can write the same game in C, Python, VB,
> whatever - why? Because to the user you may not see anything
> different (hypothetically if you chose a different language
> over another at the beginning)

You're missing the point; if you pour your time and effort into creating a mud which is indistinguishable from stock, then from the player's perspective your game is no different from a stock mud which one of those "incompetent coders" downloaded and started up 10 minutes ago.

In both cases, from the user's perspective you're running a stock mud.

In both cases, from the user's perspective you're running a stock mud.

1. Heavily modified stock code can look a lot like its earlier stock version if the interface doesn't change greatly.

2. You are assuming writing your own scratch code is meant to function exactly like a stock setup - which is simply an assumption. I am here saying it would be different, a customized way - you are here assuming it wouldn't be.

3. We can assume all day and argue about hypothetical situations no-one else brought up just to start an argument.

4. All sedan automobiles look similar in basic appearance - headlights, doors, trunks, shape... very similar, but they function much differently and the details are drastic. Does that mean its a waste of time to buy a Ford Taurus when a Toyota Corolla is very similar? Why should Toyota make cars if everyone else makes cars already?


5. Why start your own Mud when you can play someone else's? All stock versions are the same, right? (since the appearance apparently makes it the same Mud).

Sure, maybe when walk around at first glance, it looks like stock, or resembles a Mud the creator used to play in the past.

But when the user actually levels, or examines the skill system, or notices the differences in combat, or the communication channels, or maybe the score setup... or the unseen differences, how areas are laid out, how memory is managed, how ticks work differently, the hidden skills, areas, commands, etc, everything that makes a Mud what it is...

Oh yes. I'm sure that if you design your own Mud that 'looks' and 'plays' like another Mud/stock, that must mean that it is 'exactly the same', has the 'same battle system' and is set up 'exactly like' that earlier inspiration in every way shape and form.

> You are assuming writing your own scratch code is meant
> to function exactly like a stock setup - which is simply
> an assumption. I am here saying it would be different, a
> customized way - you are here assuming it wouldn't be.

I'm not assuming anything, I was simply responding to your earlier post in which you said "I have had visitors with interest come in before, and harass me about how I'm just using Rom2.4 and calling it my own. I come from a heavily modified Rom Mud... so I style it after that fact. But the point is, it's written in VB6, very fast and stable, and looks like a C version of Rom2.4."

This was in the same post that you said that "...the vast majority of Muds out there are small startup Muds with very amateur coders who have never tried to code before. Consider 90%+ have to be incompetent right now at coding a Mud from the ground up, there's you explanation on why so many Muds are stock code bases, with maybe MINOR edits."

You appear to have little respect for those "very amateur coders" who are apparently too "incompetent" to create a mud from scratch. Yet you've said your own mud is so similar to ROM that many people think you're running one. Do you not see the irony? Your mud is indistinguishable from those of the very people you're looking down on.

So the irony is that 'I am an amateur coder who doesn't even
have a running Mud criticizing amateur coders who can't run
a Mud.'

Am I getting that correct?

And no, I don't have a lot of respect for the hundreds of
Muds that pop up with three guys apparently calling
themselves the 'implementors' or 'owners', wanting to hire
coders, twenty builders, and all they have is a stock
download with stock areas, and no clue on what they're
doing.

No, I don't have a lot of respect for the 14 year olds who
think people will jump at the chance to code for anyone that
walks off the street and asks them to. As well as thinking
builders want to come and build areas for a stock Mud while
they try and figure out how to change the name of a race for
two weeks.

I don't see why you always have to come across as assuming
the worst, assuming intentions, and assuming something that
might have some different interpretations -must- mean your
interpretation is correct.

Yes. 90% of the Muds out there, at least 5 years ago, had
awful management/coding aspirations because they don't
understand, and think that everyone will volunteer their
time to make them some sort of powerful admin.

I don't sugar coat things. That's the way I see it: lazy
startup admins who attempt modifying a Mud. I also seem to
see your responses as, yes, assuming, quite often, anything
that pleases your argument even if you don't seem to have
one.


Please, re-read the original post. And then, re-read my
post. Maybe it will make more sense, maybe not. You have to
weed through the bad to find the good, as I stated. I think
90% is a definitely good number, if not on the low side.

As for irony... no, I don't see it. My intentions have been
to have similar commands as Rom2.4, similar layouts and
channels... but far different world layouts and game play.
You can think what you want, you always have.