Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

ArchPrime · 09-14-2010, 01:04 PM

I don't recall anyone ever saying that muds MUST support the new protocols. We have a least common denominator: text over telnet. If all you want to do is support that with your MUD, feel free. What I am recalling, though, is several folks wanting clients to support certain standard 'things'. The 'things' seem to be common across a lot of MUDs -- status bars, minimaps, menus, etc.

Generic plugins? So, you're telling me that plugin code I would write for MUSHClient will run without change and provide the identical user experience in other clients? I have yet to witness anything "generic" outside of telnet. What we currently have, as far as I know, is a huge amount of fragmentation across various clients that support various ways to do things( over and above Telnet). You might love that, but I think it stinks and is very inefficient.

Browser clients may indeed require zero install --- but I wasn't referring to browser clients only -- I am referring to "custom clients". And, as stated, there is a HUGE advantage to the developer in creating a custom client as it then provides the user experience that the developer wants.

09-14-2010, 01:04 PM	#82
ArchPrime Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Home MUD: Archons of Avenshar Posts: 72	Re: The mud client poll I don't recall anyone ever saying that muds MUST support the new protocols. We have a least common denominator: text over telnet. If all you want to do is support that with your MUD, feel free. What I am recalling, though, is several folks wanting clients to support certain standard 'things'. The 'things' seem to be common across a lot of MUDs -- status bars, minimaps, menus, etc. Generic plugins? So, you're telling me that plugin code I would write for MUSHClient will run without change and provide the identical user experience in other clients? I have yet to witness anything "generic" outside of telnet. What we currently have, as far as I know, is a huge amount of fragmentation across various clients that support various ways to do things( over and above Telnet). You might love that, but I think it stinks and is very inefficient. Browser clients may indeed require zero install --- but I wasn't referring to browser clients only -- I am referring to "custom clients". And, as stated, there is a HUGE advantage to the developer in creating a custom client as it then provides the user experience that the developer wants.