Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Will · 07-10-2011, 09:58 AM

I've worked with LambdaMOO for years, and I have to say, I don't understand why more folks don't use it as a game platform. It's stable. It's infinitely extensible. It's still in active development, with a large community of users who are happy to answer questions. Its license allows you to do just about anything you want to with it, and it's a snap to install and maintain.

The real appeal of LambdaMOO to me is its scripting language. The MOO language is an always-on translator that's object-oriented, dynamically typed and robust. It allows you to make instant implementations without rebooting or interrupting the game at all. And the cool thing is, if I want to make additions or changes at the source level, I can do that too. For the scripting language, there's a detailed programming manual and multiple tutorials available.

LambdaMOO's "core" architecture lets you start a game from multiple development points, whether you want all the mechanics that come packaged with JHcore and LambdaCore or you'd rather start from scratch and build your own. All you have to do is launch whichever database type that you want. Or fire up a bunch. They use minimal resources and take seconds to get running.

JHcore and LambdaCore both include comprehensive admin/user tools and huge, well-developed help systems. MinimalDB starts you out in a single room and gives you an eval command to work with. LambdaCore has a syntax manual.

My perception is that MOO's are generally thought of as persistent realities where users wield the tools to and/or are responsible for building the world and its content. And I understand that that's not the type of thing most people are looking to construct when they talk about building the games of their dreams. But it doesn't have to be that way. You can customize your core however you want and build a "MUD" just as easily in LambdaMOO as you can with LPmud, Diku, SMAUG or any other code base.

As for my "MOO," it separates coding and world-building privileges from players and tiers those admin abilities among various levels of game staff, from those who code to those who use tools to build the world and create content. The game itself has a lot of design flaws. It's outdated in a lot of ways and is no longer being actively run. But the platform is very good, in my opinion, and if you're interested in knowing more or taking a look, shoot me a PM.

Like I said: I've used LambdaMOO for a long time. I have zero experience with anything else. If anyone wants to explain why MUD developers shy away from MOO and what makes the other code bases better/more attractive, I'm all ears. There are obviously reasons why other platforms have proliferated while MOO has not, and I'm genuinly interested in hearing about them.

07-10-2011, 09:58 AM	#4
Will Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 90	Re: Types of Mu* I've worked with LambdaMOO for years, and I have to say, I don't understand why more folks don't use it as a game platform. It's stable. It's infinitely extensible. It's still in active development, with a large community of users who are happy to answer questions. Its license allows you to do just about anything you want to with it, and it's a snap to install and maintain. The real appeal of LambdaMOO to me is its scripting language. The MOO language is an always-on translator that's object-oriented, dynamically typed and robust. It allows you to make instant implementations without rebooting or interrupting the game at all. And the cool thing is, if I want to make additions or changes at the source level, I can do that too. For the scripting language, there's a detailed programming manual and multiple tutorials available. LambdaMOO's "core" architecture lets you start a game from multiple development points, whether you want all the mechanics that come packaged with JHcore and LambdaCore or you'd rather start from scratch and build your own. All you have to do is launch whichever database type that you want. Or fire up a bunch. They use minimal resources and take seconds to get running. JHcore and LambdaCore both include comprehensive admin/user tools and huge, well-developed help systems. MinimalDB starts you out in a single room and gives you an eval command to work with. LambdaCore has a syntax manual. My perception is that MOO's are generally thought of as persistent realities where users wield the tools to and/or are responsible for building the world and its content. And I understand that that's not the type of thing most people are looking to construct when they talk about building the games of their dreams. But it doesn't have to be that way. You can customize your core however you want and build a "MUD" just as easily in LambdaMOO as you can with LPmud, Diku, SMAUG or any other code base. As for my "MOO," it separates coding and world-building privileges from players and tiers those admin abilities among various levels of game staff, from those who code to those who use tools to build the world and create content. The game itself has a lot of design flaws. It's outdated in a lot of ways and is no longer being actively run. But the platform is very good, in my opinion, and if you're interested in knowing more or taking a look, shoot me a PM. Like I said: I've used LambdaMOO for a long time. I have zero experience with anything else. If anyone wants to explain why MUD developers shy away from MOO and what makes the other code bases better/more attractive, I'm all ears. There are obviously reasons why other platforms have proliferated while MOO has not, and I'm genuinly interested in hearing about them.