MXP/Extending MUD Technologies (Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Object Representations?)

[Jeff Freeman]

At 11:46 AM 8/23/00 -0500, Patrick Dughi wrote:
>You still have to buy the client, and you're limited to
>what the game you're emulating can show.  At best, you can be exactly like
>them.  

Art wise?  You'll show exactly what they show.  Maybe more, if you use art
that they've chosen not to.  Or a different/larger range of colors than
they choose to.  Or art that is a "rare item" on the real deal and which
most people have never seen, doesn't have to be so rare on your server
(which means for most people, you have something that the real deal doesn't).

Gameplay wise, you can do MUCH better than "be exactly like them", because
they have really godawful game systems and hundreds of thousands of idiots
playing them (EQ and UO anyway - I never played AC, so I don't know, maybe
AC is better, in that it only has tens of thousands of idiots playing it).

>Chances are you'll be a bit worse, and not 100% compatiable.

Art wise?  You'll show exactly what they show, or more.

Gameplay wise, I think you're right, you'll probably be worse.  But most
text muds suck, too.

Have you ever run (say) a UO emulator?  As a live mud, I mean, vs. just
messing around local.

--
  http://home.swbell.net/skeptack/




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