Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned.

KaVir · 08-12-2010, 07:00 AM

Muds predate the WWW, and magazines are more interested in screenshots of fancy graphics, so we don't have the same sort of sources as other games - and those we do have (usenet, mailing lists and forums) are not usually allowed. There are a few books that mention muds, but even those aren't always enough for Wikipedia (the Arctic MUD entry had three published sources, for example, yet it has just been deleted).

When you get people stripping out paragraphs of text from Wikipedia with comments like "Why are we still talking about MUDs in the 2000's?", it can certainly give a negative impression about the attitute towards our hobby.

08-12-2010, 07:00 AM	#239
KaVir Legend Join Date: Apr 2002 Name: Richard Home MUD: God Wars II Posts: 2,052	Re: In defense of all MUDs. Our genre's noteworthiness is being questioned. Muds predate the WWW, and magazines are more interested in screenshots of fancy graphics, so we don't have the same sort of sources as other games - and those we do have (usenet, mailing lists and forums) are not usually allowed. There are a few books that mention muds, but even those aren't always enough for Wikipedia (the Arctic MUD entry had three published sources, for example, yet it has just been deleted). When you get people stripping out paragraphs of text from Wikipedia with comments like "Why are we still talking about MUDs in the 2000's?", it can certainly give a negative impression about the attitute towards our hobby.