[MUD-Dev] Blending graphics with text

Laurel Fan lf25+ at andrew.cmu.edu
Wed Apr 14 13:54:22 CEST 1999

Excerpts from muddev: 14-Apr-99 [MUD-Dev] Blending graphics.. by
u1391470 at csi.uottawa.ca 
> Since we have associated rooms, we have kept room descriptions, titles,
> etc. I am not sure if we need these at all (after all, don't most players
> tog brief anyways?). Similarly, do we need text saying:

Well, I'd keep them, because if for example I'm building a 100 room
area, it'd probably end up that it would be representable by a minimum
of about 25 tiles, and have mroe information than the text than the
graphics simply because I can write much better than I can draw :)  It
seems like text-only and graphics-only require whole different
philosophies, such as a world in terms of "rooms" or a "map".

Of course, you will need _some_ text, especially for communication
between players and between players and npcs (Unless of course, you
intend for them to communicate with sign language..).
>     A <mob name here> stands to the <direction>.
> when that same mob has an associated icon already visible on the map
> screen?

If you have a lot of different npcs that look similar (especially if
you're using small/low res icons) or use the same icon, you might want,
for example, a list of names next to the icons on the right side of the
screen, so that players who see the icon of the blonde woman in a white
dress can tell the difference between the temple priestess and Princess
Jenny's ghost.

> For now, we have kept all this text for those players who will be
> connecting without the client (we haven't opened for beta yet), but seeing
> as the client is free and supports most things other clients do
> (aliasing/triggers/variables/sounds/etc.), is this even a valid concern?
> Similarly, people who telnet in are able to see an asci map rather than
> jpg/gifs.

Unless the client is available to every player (having only a windows
x86 binary does not mean available to every player), then there will be
people who will want to play but not be able to run the client.  It's
perfectly valid to require the client, but you'll of course have to
weigh the pros and cons of it.  It seems like a very difficult task to
keep a graphical and text version consistent and fair (most muds have
trouble with keeping color and no color the same..).

I'd be interested in how this turns out...

MUD-Dev maillist  -  MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the mud-dev-archive mailing list