[MUD-Dev] Games vs. simulations

[Travis Casey]

Monday, June 19, 2000, 3:09:41 PM, adam at treyarch.com wrote:
atc> On Thu, 15 Jun 2000, Richard Tew wrote:

>> I'm finding that the biggest problem so far is working out how to
>> generate decent room descriptions based on where everything is
>> placed in the room.

atc> Funny - I found that bit strikingly easy.  In fact, the basic implementation in
atc> general is not terribly difficult.  I had always assumed that text muds did
atc> not use coordinate systems because people found them too hard to program.
atc> Obviously this is not the case.

What all sorts of effects are you including?  Conceptually, some of it
seems fairly easy to me, but the really cool bits seem like they'd
actually be easier to do in a graphical mud.  For example, if my 3'
tall halfling is standing 8' away from a screen that is 6' tall and
has a 1' gap at the bottom, how should the system describe the 5' tall
elf who's standing 6" behind the screen?

For graphical environments, there are well-known solutions to that
sort of problem, but problems like that seem to me to be very
difficult to handle in a text-based mud -- basically, the system has
to do all the calculations needed to determine what my character can
actually see, then come up with a text-based description based on
that.

>> Other than that, I can't say I have any other major concerns that
>> I can think of at this time about the gameplayers POV.

atc> Ah - but does it *add* anything from the player's POV?

I'd say that depends on the players.  For a typical hack-and-slasher,
say, probably not.  For the kind of player who might want to do
something like hide a book behind a couch, though, it might very well.

atc> Obviously these are some of the most obvious reasons to implement
atc> a coordinate-based system.  Without it, these things are difficult or
atc> impossible.  I first became interested in coordinates while trying to create
atc> a giant keep upon a floating island (think Castle Black in Brust's Taltos
atc> books).

I did something similar on an LP once by making a description
generator for a set of rooms.  It was a forest where in each forest room,
it was possible to climb a tree to get a look around.  If you did so, the
description would be something like:

 From here, you see a sea of treetops below you.  To the north, you see
 a break in the treetops -- a clearing?  Far to the west, you see a
 line of cliffs that tower over your perch.  To the southwest, you see
 the glint of sunlight on water -- a lake?  To the northeast are
 faraway hills, and south of them, you can barely make out the
 buildings of a town.

The actual info the generator had to work from was something like:

clearing -- N
cliffs -- far W
lake -- SW
hills -- far NE

The descriptions for the treetops were created from that, plus
randomized flavor text.  For me, it was easier than setting up a grid,
especially since I didn't have mud-level control.
 
atc> Or perhaps I should say that it *did* work out, but from the ant's-eye view
atc> of the players, all of this depth was lost.

That's a definite problem -- players often don't seem to notice
richness of detail, even when the details given relate to things they
can do in the area.  I think part of it is a narrowness of
expectations -- very few people in my area ever even thought to try
climbing the trees, probably because they didn't expect to be able to.

atc> The original question was, "Why hasn't everyone (or anyone) gone to complete
atc> coordinate-based system?"  The answer is not that it is impossible or
atc> even undesirable.  Simply that the amount of work necessary to get such a
atc> system into a state even resembling "fun" is huge.  In other words, you
atc> sink a huge amount of time and energy into it *just to get it to the point
atc> where it's approximately as usable as room-based systems*.  To actually get
atc> it to be "better", you have to spend that much more!

atc> If you have that time and want to spend it that way, please feel free.  But
atc> in answer to why "everyone" isn't using such a system, the answer is simple:
atc> a huge amount of work very a fairly small payback.  As a hobbiest, I like
atc> to go more for elements that require smaller amounts of work and larger
atc> payoffs.

Yep... a basic coordinate system isn't hard, but the things that
really interest me in having one are things like the halfling,
screen, and elf I mention above -- which is really easier to do by
going graphical.

--
       |\      _,,,---,,_    Travis S. Casey  <efindel at earthlink.net>
 ZZzz  /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   No one agrees with me.  Not even me.
      |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'-'
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)   





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev