I was just considering the development of muds and was woundering.....

What is the single most power langauge to create a mud?

What is the easyest?

Is custom code essentail in good design for a mud?

Finaly, do you think that it in the end really matter now days with high speed connection and processors what language you use as far as creating a mud goes could they all viturally get the job done with the same power and proficiency?

As of right now I want to code a mud in java, but like i said i didn't know so I might wait and buy a c+ book and see if i can get something started there.

If you looking at a java codebase that already stable and available, take a look at CoffeeMUD. CoffeeMUD is nice if your looking for an 'out-of-the-box ready to go' experience with a web-based game editor.

If you looking for a good project to get you started in using Java, I would recommend the JavaMUD project based through SourceForge.net. JavaMUD project is more inline for those using Java in a more OOB setting, allowing for a load/unload code environment to be utilized (like that of LPMuds).

CoffeeMUD:
JavaMUD:

-- M

Java has upsides and downsides like any language. Platform independency, however, is a myth when it comes to Java. In theory it may be platform independent. In practice that assumes, as you say, that each machine has the same Java setup on it. Sadly, unless you want to limit yourself to Java 1.1 (which thorougly sucks), you're going to be doing a LOT of tinkering to actually make it work on the various hardware platform and browser combinations. Not that it wouldn't be worse in C++ or whatnot of course, but the Java spinmeisters would have you believe Java is truly write once, run anywhere.

--matt

From someone who has been using Java since the first alpha, Java is truly write once run anywhere. Nothing else comes close. You must be mentioning Java 1.1 due to the embedded Java-in-the-browser issue. Browsers only embed Java 1.1 (due to licensing I believe), so if you write something to use Java 1.4 features, it won't run under browsers that support only Java 1.1. That's a version portability issue, not a platform portability issue. Anyway, if you're writing a MUD it won't matter, since Java only runs on the server anyway, and you get to choose your OS/Java version as you wish.

Thedia

Yeah, it's good that way for server stuff, but for GUI stuff (such as for your MUD's client) it is a bit of the suck. We've been facing tons of issues there and I've been told by a lot of Bejeweled-type puzzle game developers that they have the same sorts of issues.

--matt

These are not questions that anybody can answer for you. All we can give is preferences. That said, in general I find higher-level languages to be a better match for mud server development. My personal choice is C# at the moment, and I would most certainly choose it over Java.

Good design of what? The game? The codebase? If the design of the current codebase prevents you from doing what you think is best, then sure it's essential.

No, it doesn't matter. Muds are in that class of applications that don't need to care about performance 95% of the time. And when there is a performance problem, the answer is usually to cache something. A simple, straight-forward design makes determining that something rather easy.

I recommend against writing in C++ in this day and age. Other languages do so much more for you, and when it comes to application development this can increase your productivity significantly.

What's interesting is that my client *will* run, reliably, and predictably, on every platform supported by Sun Java 1.5, and probably just as well on any platform supported by a third-party v1.5 JVM, *and* it will look and perform identically everywhere it runs. It's hard to believe, but Sun has achieved this. Swing (for the GUI) and Java itself are 100% portable. If you're having trouble getting it to work, I'd be glad to help you with architecture decisions, or help with whatever you're getting stuck with, just drop me an email or catch me in-game. If you're using the Java 1.1 AWT trash that's built into some browsers, then it would be very non-portable for sure, perhaps that's what your Bejeweled-type developers are talking about. They are quite likely trying to design something that will work with all of these old browsers without having to download a multi-megabyte Java plugin.

Thedia

Personally, I don't think it matters so much what language the server itself is written in, but how easy it is for your builders and creators to add unique areas to the mud and how easy it is to write intelligent mobs.

I far prefer an LP type MUD (LDMUD, MUDOS and variants). LPC is very flexible and things can be changed on the fly without recompiling the server.

Yep, that's the main issue. Java 1.1 is too prevalent to discard and a multi-megabyte download is unacceptable for our purposes. It's great to say that Java is portable between platforms, but the usefulness of that feature is incredibly diminished by the need for people to update their Java installs in order for it to actually work.

Python.

Python.

Python. Er, I mean yes. If there's no custom code, then on one level you can claim there is no design. So it can't be good. But really, you're thinking about this the wrong way. Decide what you want from a MUD, then look at how you would have to go about providing those features. If all you want is a DIKU with 200 areas, then it would be foolish to demand that you code yourself a new codebase for it.

I think that should be 2 sentences rather than 1... Connection speed has nothing to do with language choice. Instead, the choice should mainly be governed by what you're proficient at, since that's probably going to be the main factor in how long it takes and how well it is coded. Language performance is barely worth thinking about here.

Java is more than adequate for MUD server development. If that's what you're familiar with, go for it.

Mushcode:

MooCode:

Mushcode is friendly to newbies only after about 10 hits of LSD. It's unreadable, write once garbage that makes .

That there doesn't happen to be a builtin is not the point. It isn't on most mushes either. Mushcode has no syntactic coherency. There are dozens of semantic rules and exceptions to learn and gotchas. It's not newbie friendly language.

Rather
"...abyss of blind gibbering chaos..."

yes exactly :-P