21 Jul, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 41st comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
The only thing I want to see, client-wise, is something as clean, intuitive and simple as GMUD.

But hopefully not as broken.

Littlehorn said:
Sure, having a custom flash or java client in your browser does help with the presentation. I just don't think it's worth it in the long run because so many mudders use their own custom clients. I think to newer players who never played a MUD before, such a presentation would hook them more than saw you average JMC or zMUD user.

Sure, but that alone is still a good reason for having a browser client - muds need fresh blood, and a modern interface is more appealing to modern gamers.

However I've also noticed that the popularity of specific clients can vary dramatically between muds, and it seems to depend heavily on which client/s a particular mud recommends. Around half of my active players use MUSHclient for example, and that number has greatly increased since I introduced the MUSHclient plugin.

You've mentioned many of your players using JMC and Mudlet, but I'm guessing that's just an estimate from talking to people, as your mud doesn't appear to do use any negotiation (other than ECHO for passwords). If you actually collected statistics on client usage, I would expect to see quite a few MUSHclient users, as that's the first recommendation on your website's newbie FAQ.

Littlehorn said:
KaVir said:
This is the direction many of the bigger muds are going. Personally I think it's pretty cool, and I've jumped on the bandwagon and tried to encourage others to do the same. But I think it's going to take years yet before it becomes mainstream - as plamzi says, for many mud owners it's just not something they consider fun.

Well, it's def not bad to do it. I'm just trying to justify the time if it's worth the return.

Not an uncommon sentiment, that's the main reason why I created my protocol snippet. Now people just have to decide whether 10-15 minutes of effort is worth the return.
21 Jul, 2011, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 42nd comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
That's very true. It's also true (and we tend to forget) that the field is populated with hobbyists. Not only does their level of expertise vary greatly, but for many of them having fun is almost more important than having players. I think that explains why many MUDs don't have even the most basic GUI just as it explains why every other person is writing their own codebase or their own MUD client. People generally do what they consider fun.

I am a coder not a graphist. I can code a stand alone application from scratch, but everything web related I only have a slight idea, and do not really want to go into it.
We live in a world where either you are average in many field or really good in some.
It is not like I don't care about a customized client, it is that I don't have the human time to do anythign I want, especially stuff I am not really good in (even more waste of time)
My mud now support msdp but only cause of KaVir snippet. I would NEVER implemented it if I had to write the code myself. Because I did not have the demand, so that would have been a waste of time. If Kavir release is gui code, or if I found a good enough template I would probably use it and tweak it to tie it to my mud, but I will not take the time to develop it from scratch.
When you mostly do everything alone, yes you tie to what interest you, and even then I still have many thing I wish were done by other people. Writing help is not perticulary fun, especially when you are not a native speaker.
Even when I code a skill, I ask my players the text.
21 Jul, 2011, Dean wrote in the 43rd comment:
Votes: 0
Runter said:
Scandum said:
Runter said:
If all structured data were created equal it would be the same. However, is MSDP available in 100 implementations across 50 different languages?

Parsing JSON is about 100 lines of straight forward code, which is the reason why it's available in 100 implementations across 50 different languages, just like strlen(). I'll admit I'd be annoyed if I had to write my own strlen() function, but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker.


Yes, JSOn is easy to implement. Yes, it's the strlen() of data serialization. You're making my point for me. What does that have to do with justification for My Silly Duplicate Protocol?


21 Jul, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 44th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
If Kavir release is gui code, or if I found a good enough template I would probably use it and tweak it to tie it to my mud, but I will not take the time to develop it from scratch.

I did actually release an example MUSHclient plugin for people to use as a starting point. I've also said that anyone can copy the code for my MUSHclient and Mudlet GUIs - it's only the actual graphics I ask people not to reuse for their own muds, but I've provided links to various websites where you can download public domain images for your own use.
21 Jul, 2011, Rarva.Riendf wrote in the 45th comment:
Votes: 0
KaVir said:
Rarva.Riendf said:
If Kavir release is gui code, or if I found a good enough template I would probably use it and tweak it to tie it to my mud, but I will not take the time to develop it from scratch.

I did actually release an example MUSHclient plugin for people to use as a starting point. I've also said that anyone can copy the code for my MUSHclient and Mudlet GUIs - it's only the actual graphics I ask people not to reuse for their own muds, but I've provided links to various websites where you can download public domain images for your own use.

Oh ? I looked in the code repository and did not found anything by your name. And I admit I did not check if you could see the code from a plugin you downloaded in mush, as I do not really know the client either, I only checked that your plugin was indeed working well with my mud with hp/mana bar meaning msdp was working as it should for people who wanted it.
21 Jul, 2011, KaVir wrote in the 46th comment:
Votes: 0
Rarva.Riendf said:
Oh ? I looked in the code repository and did not found anything by your name.

You can grab it from here, and it looks like this. Pretty basic, but it works, so it's a quick and easy way to get started. The graphics are just bmp or png files, so you can simply replace them with different images to create your own theme, like Ansalon have done.

I keep meaning to put one together for Mudlet as well, but I've been rather busy lately.
21 Jul, 2011, Kaz wrote in the 47th comment:
Votes: 0
"The aggressive monster hits you lightly"?

That's fantastic. I just had a mental image of something the size of a rancor pushing you on the shoulder and going, "Dawwwwwww, shucks."

Oops, sorry for the derail.
21 Jul, 2011, Ssolvarain wrote in the 48th comment:
Votes: 0
KaVir said:
Ssolvarain said:
The only thing I want to see, client-wise, is something as clean, intuitive and simple as GMUD.

But hopefully not as broken.


I'm pretty sure that was already implied.

Surprised that link didn't mention the more troubling ansi problem, where it switches {w with {W (off-white with bright white).
22 Jul, 2011, Davion wrote in the 49th comment:
Votes: 0
Ssolvarain said:
KaVir said:
Ssolvarain said:
The only thing I want to see, client-wise, is something as clean, intuitive and simple as GMUD.

But hopefully not as broken.


I'm pretty sure that was already implied.

Surprised that link didn't mention the more troubling ansi problem, where it switches {w with {W (off-white with bright white).


That's not actually a problem. By default GMud sets the default colour as bright white. Gotta change the default colour if you want it to display properly. My biggest gripe with GMud was that it occasionally crashed when opening another tab. -very- annoying.
22 Jul, 2011, Ssolvarain wrote in the 50th comment:
Votes: 0
I didn't know that even worked.
40.0/50