[Orrin]

Originally Posted by Butler I can see the same symtoms here with you guys as i see on another games community: your so used to the way things are run, and mildly disattached to the other existing markets that your missing key movements that are/could be in your best interests. You just need an independent source to help point these out.

This forum isn't necessarily representative of MUDs, let alone MU*s or text games as a whole so I'd be wary of reading too much into some of the comments here.

I think you'll find most of the big commercial games do care about advertising, promotions and the like. I know for example IRE track their referrals through the different stages of character creation and tutorial so they can see at which points they are losing players. They also track how much referrals spend so they know the value of any particular advertising channel. We used to do similar tracking on the relatively small game that I ran and I think it's pretty standard stuff these days.

Hobby muds may be a different story and while Jazuela's point about most games not being able to charge is a little misleading, it is true that most MUDs are non-commercial.

There's also the issue that a lot of MUD owners just aren't that motivated when it comes to improving their new user experience, for all sorts of reasons.

I think that for many people MUDs are basically a retro experience and trying to modernise them would be pointless.

[scandum]

If you play an old school game like Zorg or Adventure you'll notice that MUDs moved from being exploration games to being achieving games.

Both in MUDs and MMOs the game worlds are deserts, in the case of MUDs builders try to write pretty descriptions to make it look like something, in the case of MMOs artists try to paint pretty pictures to make it look like something.

MMOs are likely to eventually incorporate physics engines and generate images which would allow for a more dynamic and interactive world. MUDs have an advantage here as rather than complex graphics they only need to generate acceptable descriptions, which is still quite a challenge.

The next stage for MUDs is obviously the handling of physics and the automatic generation of meaningful descriptions. However, the complexity of this is so great that it's highly unlikely that it will ever see the light of day.

[Butler]

I did point out other ways to gain more players...but I still maintain that a graphcial take, such as Plazmis iOs client are a good way to go.

I mentioned numerous communities where you could advertise or "join" where devs can advertise. I mean, i've seen an MMO effectively live of Linux Format, and its readerbase are more likely to turn to MU*ing than Windows players, if their new too it. Just check out ad prices, or make a collarative effort to buy an ad for mutlitple games.

As for most games being non commercial and non charging, thats two different matters. basically every single P2P MMO part WoW has lost players, and Free to Play is no normal. If you check through those communities, you'll find some good/bad ways to create funds. I did give you a fairly good range of markets lacking competition or have a larger chance to contai interested parties.

And yes, i fleet between ideas in my writing. Sorry, i know its confusing, but i just write what occurs to me, and then you can at least see what other thoughts came to me.

I may have gone into depth, and complicated some things, but the basic bullet points i gave are rather simple to understand. And I'm really trying to direct to those who want to become succesfull and own their on IP. Obviously those who embarked on games based off popular media cant really enter the market without the hassle of gaining a license, but those with their own IP can move into these markets. as for those who dont want to be massively popular, they can ignore this post/thread obivously. the population shouting STFU N00B would contrast the kindness of most of the community. I also cant BELIEVE that you think there are text gamers and graphics gamers. Black and white. I bet most of the players of MU*s will dabble at least occasionally in grpahics games.

As for graphics, i was suggesting things similiar to the plugins you already got for MUSH...or like the Bedlam graphics. I'm actually intrigued by what Primordiax played like from what Threshold said. I wonder if i'll ever get the chance to see. This is what a kind of meant (this was made in maybe 1/2 hour from scratch, apart from Inventory items that i made before. All Copyright to me):

Obiviously thats a very rough idea, but it gives you the basic concept. Its friendlier to the player at first site. Oh look, thats what im wearing. Ahhhh thats what im carrying. Ok thats howi can navigate. Pretty much i took everything from God Wars II/Aarwolf and added Inventory/Equipment panels. Package it as F2P client, and its already a step closer to being more inviting for new players. My dad saw me playing and said "Oh, your back on that MUD thing. Wow, i could never get the hang of them. Oh well, i'll leave you too it, im getting a headache." ANSII colours on black arent attractive to everybody, and the MUDs have a very omnious face, as someone said above. Make the HUD look more inviting and creative advertsing, thats how to increase playerbases.

[Jazuela]

You're not understanding even a little of the issue regarding advertising and licensing. I'm not talking about copyright of the theme of the mud. I'm talking about the copyright and licensing of the CODE of the mud. The actual code that the mud developer uses, as his primary method of writing the game. The code - in MOST text-based games, is either DIKU, LP, CIRCLE, or a derivitive of those three. As such, the mud developer has agreed to not charge players to play those muds. They are -required- to be free to play. The mud developer is not -allowed- to receive money from players to use for advertising - one of them won't let the developer receive money for any reason at all, and DIKUs are a little looser, and allow donations - but not a fee, and never required, - to cover the cost of the server.

The only people who are allowed to charge for muds, are people who create the *code* itself, from scratch, or people who use codebases that come with commercial licenses. There are very very few of either in existence. The vast majority of text-based muds in existence are DIKU, LP, and Circle - and derivitives thereof.

[Verbannon]

Another issue with modernizing MUDs is that existing muds generally have all of their efforts focused on creating new content. Something huge like adding an interface or really anything takes a lot of time away from that.

[Butler]

You seem to be missing what im saying: im reffering more to God Wars II ( has custom codebase), Aardwolf (they accept donations to pay for development) and Threshold (which is P2P) type games. I understand the Diku/Circle/LP issue, but there are ways to make alternate funds for advertising. Obviously a good one is IOS clients, androdi clients etc. or say on kongregate, where you can get money donated.

I don't understand fully, but i do know the issues regarding licensing.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by Verbannon Another issue with modernizing MUDs is that existing muds generally have all of their efforts focused on creating new content. Something huge like adding an interface or really anything takes a lot of time away from that.

Yeah, it can take at least an hour or two.

[plamzi]

Originally Posted by KaVir Yeah, it can take at least an hour or two.

For the kind of interface that would actually make a difference, the work would be about as much as your efforts on the server. But (it has been my argument all along) in this day and age, if you neglect the client (or put two hours in it as opposed to the same LoE you invest in the server), then you don't really have a game as far as the vast majority of players is concerned. All you have is a socket server that only a small secret society known as mudders can figure out how to play.

Again, I harbor no illusions that anything will change. Most hobbyist MUD admins run a text-based game precisely because they don't want to care about anything client-side. Most are OK with not having any players, or with having so few players that by any industry-wide definition the game has been a ghost town for 15 years. Many admins spend many years developing dev-pleasing features like mob AI and physics engines that do nothing to increase a game's general appeal. Yet, any thought of a custom client is dismissed as too much work.

That's freedom for ya.

[Verbannon]

Doesn't a custom client require a whole different type of programming knowledge then building or programming the physics engine or anything like that?

[Fiendish]

I post here very infrequently. I think the last time was in 2008. Here's where I get all cranky and tell you why your great ideas aren't happening in a lot of words because I need to make up for the absence...

Originally Posted by Butler This is what a kind of meant (this was made in maybe 1/2 hour from scratch, apart from Inventory items that i made before. All Copyright to me): Obiviously thats a very rough idea, but it gives you the basic concept.

Hey that looks really nice. Want to code it up and add in hooks for Aardwolf's GMCP messages and stuff? I know a guy who knows a guy who can get you an in with the developer there.

Here's the thing, though. Aardwolf is Lasher's hobby, not his business, just like nobody pays me in any currency that I can use to buy food or clothing or shelter for client scripting work ( I do this, btw -> https://code.google.com/p/aardwolfclientpackage/ ). We do these things in our spare time, when we have spare time, because that's how we like spending spare time. And I guarantee you that almost every single MUD ever created falls into that category. The ones that don't are called businesses. On a side note, name five MUD businesses that I have heard of.

So the first thing you have to realize is that you're really not talking about MUD development here when you wax poetic about developing a whole new interface paradigm. For a lot of people you're talking about starting something closer to a business venture. And as Kimberly "Sweet Brown" Wilkins will tell you, ain't nobody got time for that.

Obiviously thats a very rough idea, but it gives you the basic concept. Its friendlier to the player at first site. Oh look, thats what im wearing. Ahhhh thats what im carrying. Ok thats howi can navigate. Pretty much i took everything from God Wars II/Aarwolf and added Inventory/Equipment panels.

Ok, it's a rough idea. But, and let's say that we've solved the problem of time and desire and money, it's a really really good idea. Except there are details. Like, It's cool that you took some existing ideas from Aardwolf and figured "Hey wouldn't it be neat if they had a paper doll equipment manager and box-style inventory too! Diablo does it, so it must be good!". This is a fantastic idea if your game has players carrying very few items, but it's hard to see how that could work on Aardwolf. We have players carrying hundreds or even thousands of items at a time. Inventory management is like a full time job for some people. And we get groups of more than 30 players at a time (that's more than a lot of entire playerbases out there) fighting just as many enemies. Where does that fit into your Buttles VS Furious Giant box? Game design issue? I don't care to speculate, but the players we have seem to like it. It's just really really hard to sufficiently represent any significant level of scale and detail in little cartoon boxes that still need to leave room for a big box of scrolling text on the side without getting...well...a lot less pretty.
And scale is ultimately what you're talking about as a goal, isn't it? Isn't it?

So now it's not just about making things pretty. It's about making this pretty while still making sense! And I think that that is pretty hard. Can it be solved? Sure, probably. But now you're talking about programmers AND designers. That's called a team, and making teams for projects like this is hard. But maybe you're a one-man-show, otherwise jobless guru designer&programmer in one neat little package. Bully for you; I'm not that flexible.

Make the HUD... thats how to increase playerbases.

Hey, I've been saying that for years! I'm getting old, and new material is difficult, so I'm going to start quoting myself from elsewhere now...

Forget Zork and other text adventure games. MUDing is actually nothing like them. MUDing is more like NetHack and other Roguelikes. It's a dungeon crawler. Even the very first dungeon crawlers knew that you needed some visual representation of the world. And yet, for some unfathomable reason, MUDs were designed like a cross between an Infocom adventure and an IRC channel. It's such an extremely wrong paradigm. Your real world has physical dimensions. If you're not blind, you can see things. If you're not deaf, you can hear things. If you're not injured in some severe way, you can probably touch things. You as a human are used to, and evolved for, interacting with the world in these terms. The fundamental problem of interaction between you, the human, and the game world is that the game can only communicate with you via letters. I don't care how much you want to lie to yourself about how text is superior because it "frees the imagination to create the world more vividly than any graphics". That's self deception at best, and it's hurting you. Text introduces the need for mental filters. Words go in, mental images come out. And that's great, but the more filters that you need to constantly process with your brain, the more apart you are from the game world and the more energy you must constantly expend to interact with it. Reading makes a new player TIRED. Comprehension is exhausting! This is what drives players away.

It's all true. Widgets and boxes and whatnot are wonderful things. And anyone who says otherwise can have their 10 players on at a time ghost town. But you've just doodled a thing without having to actually worry about how to make it work or build it.

Solve the making it work problem first and add the colors later.

[Orrin]

If someone were bored and wanted to help spread the modern interface love they could always translate KaVir's generic mushclient UI to the web and add websocket support to his server snippet.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by plamzi For the kind of interface that would actually make a difference, the work would be about as much as your efforts on the server.

That's simply not true. Even a simple GUI, thrown together in a couple of hours, can be a significant improvement over a plain terminal window - furthermore, once you get the ball rolling it's not uncommon to see players following your example, designing their own interfaces for your game.

I don't know why people continue to perpetuate the idea that it's not worth bothering with any graphics at all unless you're creating a fully graphical MUD/MMORPG. That's the server equivalent of insisting that it's not worth modifying a stock codebase, either use it as-is or write a mud from scratch.

[Malifax]

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD This is not true. Here is a video showing my MUSHclient plugins: ForgottenMUD - YouTube

Honestly curious: If I may ask, is there an image for most locations in the game? If so, how'd you manage that quantity of artwork?

-Mal

[plamzi]

Originally Posted by plamzi
For the kind of interface that would actually make a difference, the work would be about as much as your efforts on the server.

Originally Posted by KaVir That's simply not true. Even a simple GUI, thrown together in a couple of hours, can be a significant improvement over a plain terminal window - furthermore, once you get the ball rolling it's not uncommon to see players following your example, designing their own interfaces for your game.

By "the kind of interface that would actually make a difference", I meant a UI that a modern-day teenager can pick up and just play, something extremely visual and streamlined, where there would be no need to type a command or process a wall of text.

Yes, it's true that something is better than nothing, and that having a rudimentary UI may get you some attention, but most (or all) of that attention is going to come from existing mudders who are fine with the wall of text and the typing (in fact, need the wall of text and the typing) and who view the graphics around that window as a "tactical" HUD that makes it easier to determine one's location, or monitor one's vitals, etc. Those are all passive UI elements.

Show me a MUD UI that actually lets people click, drag and drop, and swipe to accomplish everything they need to play (of course, they'll need to type if they want to chat, or RP/emote). Then tell me that this kind of UI takes only a few hours to make. Yet, this is the kind of UI that will actually make a difference, the kind that actually deals away with the terminal window.

Originally Posted by KaVir I don't know why people continue to perpetuate the idea that it's not worth bothering with any graphics at all unless you're creating a fully graphical MUD/MMORPG. That's the server equivalent of insisting that it's not worth modifying a stock codebase, either use it as-is or write a mud from scratch.

Taking exception from being one of those "people", I too have observed that some people's "license to do nothing" response is that if you're building this kind of UI, why drive it with a MUD server? The reasons are many, and they vary somewhat from one game to another. I've already talked about how MUD worlds compare favorably to those of Browser-Based games. Many are more sophisticated than even the top commercial 3D MMORG's. It would be sad to see all that good work consigned to obscurity.

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD This is not true. Here is a video showing my MUSHclient plugins: ForgottenMUD - YouTube It's not particularly beautiful but it's extremely easy to use. Most actions can be done with the mouse. I only spent 2 months on it which is 2% of the time I spent on the server.

This is a good start, but again, the wall of text is still there, in the center of it all. For any action you do, the response is a flow of text you have to read through. The window showing your environment is not interactive. NPCs and PCs are little panels, not part of the environment. Everything sits around the text window, just like in any other so-called MUD GUI out there.

For 2% of the time, you did very well. Now, can you share with us the rate of success you've had getting non-mudders to play your game via this UI? I would like to believe that this is enough to get youngsters to play a MUD and tell their friends about it, but until I hear back from you on that, I'm going to be skeptical.

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD MUD developers perhaps would rather have no client than an ugly client. It's rare for a programmer to also be a graphic designer. ... Or perhaps they don't care to be popular. Creating a MUD is like art. You can invest a lot of money on Auto-Tune and other softwares to make popular music, but it doesn't mean that the lone musician on his cheap guitar is doing it wrong.

Yes, I've observed the same. Still I can't help but wish that at least one out of every ten MUD developers would show interest in client design. After all, many of us use working on a MUD as a way to acquire new skills. And still it seems that the people *learning* to develop obscure server-side features far outnumber the people *learning* to design UI's.

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD You need a high budget to buy good graphics: how much did you spend on Bedlam's iPhone application?

Working on the latest iOS app update was a bit of a revelation. There is now a lot of high-quality fantasy stock art out there that's really inexpensive. Sci-fi is a lot harder find, but maybe in a few years it won't be. Even for a hobbyist spending out of their own pocket with no intent to make that money back, but who wants to see if they can make their game more appealing, it's worth it to look around.

Originally Posted by Fiendish But, and let's say that we've solved the problem of time and desire and money, it's a really really good idea. Except there are details. Like, It's cool that you took some existing ideas from Aardwolf and figured "Hey wouldn't it be neat if they had a paper doll equipment manager and box-style inventory too! Diablo does it, so it must be good!". This is a fantastic idea if your game has players carrying very few items, but it's hard to see how that could work on Aardwolf. We have players carrying hundreds or even thousands of items at a time. Inventory management is like a full time job for some people.

I assume that you mean "thousands of different items" that can't simply be stacked by item number. So, if you have this mechanic and if "inventory management is like a full time job for some people", then what are you currently doing to make that job easier in your text interface? Do you provide a method where they can view and manipulate only the items in their inventory matching a certain keyword or string, or starting with a certain letter only? Do you let them view the inventory sorted in different ways, by item type as well as alphabetically?

Some of what you may have already done for your text interface can be mirrored in a graphical inventory. A search box appearing if you have more than 100 unique items, tabbed windows that organize items alphabetically, different types of clicks to multi-select different subsets of items. And, let's not forget that graphical inventory windows can scroll endlessly just like a text window can, and that they display more items per line.

So, while this is a great example of why designing a good UI is actually hard, I believe that in this case there are many good design choices that can make your players' lives a lot easier vs. what they have to do now in all-text.

But, and I have to say this, over a thousand unique items in a character's inventory?! To me, that's going overboard a little bit, and I don't mean the realism of it From a game design PoV, I would be asking myself, do all these items really need to be carried around all the time? And even, do all these things actually need to be items?

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by plamzi Yes, it's true that something is better than nothing, and that having a rudimentary UI may get you some attention

It's likely to draw a lot more attention than investing an extra couple of hours into server development. It also means you've got the infrastructure in place for supporting a more advanced interface in the future, and sets an example that may inspire players to continue the work for you.

All in all, I consider it a solid investment of time, regardless of whether or not you want to take the concept further yourself. I don't think people should be discouraged with the suggestion that they must invest vast amounts of time for it to be worthwhile. Instead, I would far rather point out the advantages of simply getting your foot in the door.

[plamzi]

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD Of course, the text window is the central element of the client. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a text-based MUD anymore.

The whole point of having a graphical client is to engage people who don't see themselves as someone who would play a text-based MUD. Are you worried about definitions or do you want young people to play your game and talk about it with their friends?

If someone can play your game with a text-only client, then it's a text-based game, even if someone else can play it with a hybrid client. Many people may disagree with that, but the reasons they do are either because they are purists (people who not only want to experience the world as text, but who also want everyone else to experience it that way) or because they are looking for an excuse to do nothing, or both.

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD Now, it would be better if pressing the inventory button showed a graphical inventory instead of a text one. But my rebuttal was that the client is extremely easy to use, not that it's beautiful or interactive. You said that "only a small secret society known as mudders can figure out how to play."

A lot of us are so steeped in MUDs that we can't even imagine what it is like for someone who has never played one before to be seated in front of one and given 5 min. to level up with no help. If you have a teenager in your surroundings who fits that description, try a little experiment with your client. I would be shocked if they somehow knew to click on the numbers inside the text window that don't look like either buttons or links. In fact, I would be shocked if their first reaction was something other than "Well, first of all, this doesn't look like a game. Where the hell is my character and how the hell do I move around or attack?"

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD I have zero success. However...

Then I'm not going to feel that my point has been debunked. Although I wish it had been.

Someone mentioned earlier in the thread that there is now no stigma against playing classical or retro games. Maybe that's true among older gamers, and maybe that covers all games up to 8-bit *graphics*. It doesn't seem to apply to games that look like chatrooms. And it's not really about the stigma. It's mostly about the fact that picking up a text-based game without prior experience is extremely hard. It was nerdy/geeky even back in the 1990's.

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD I currently have 141 room pictures: one picture is used for several rooms. I have only made one myself, the rest was found for free on the Internet, mostly released under the Creative Commons license.

You should take a look at the subscription packages on Stock Photos: Download Stock Photography And Royalty Free Images By Dreamstime. Also, you can add at least 100 more images for free by browsing Free Stock Photos & Images | StockFreeImages.com.

[Butler]

Good graphics dont need to be expensive. Anything like the Inventory items i did will take maybe an hour or so, and if you go to something like thespritersresource.com , once you have enough post, request a design, explain why you want it, and probably they'll give let you use it without royalties, as long as they keep copyright. As for making scenes, get a few basic backgrounds, buildings etc. then use the wonder of layers.

As for saying i took the GUI elements from classic game, i didn't. I just took it from a generic MMO. Its actually the first thing i panicked about in my first few minutes of trying a MUD, after navigation is trying to figure out what i've got and have. As for the character on opposition...i kind of got the basic idea from God Wars II...when i fought the practice dummy I generally based my idea off 3 games: Maps and text off Aardwolf, Basic HUD shape off God Wars II and Inventory from an MMO.

And as has been pointed out above, client development is a visual upgrade. Actually, the reason why I tried God Wars II is its interesting client, apposed to the restricted ones i saw elsewhere. As for elements that make playing easier than typing, i dont think you need too much, maybe a few buttons for the most common commands, like the quick keys in God Wars II or Aliases in other games. Obviously these should have a delay in input, to make PvP fair. I think the wall of text needs to be their, or else you might lose sight of what your working on. Key is to make something user friendly enough that people will be more likely to play, but not too useful that people get overreliant on it. they need to know what text is associated with which GUI input.

As for programming side of things, i admit it, im not a programmer like most of you. I'm a graphics man who can do basic computer generated and ok hand draw graphics. Hey wait, theirs quite alot of people who do that, actually i found one site with a bigger community who do mostly that. For no money.

I also know of a video game music designer who works for a one off fee, and will work on your project until your pleased with it.

Also, just kind of to go back, you should still think of writing to niche mags like Linux Format to get game reviews. Anyway for those interested, todays last day before i write to RetroGamer magazine. They cover stuff similiar to your games, and once notified, will probably review your MUDGamer iOS app, and some of the more popular games.

[Butler]

Wait no stigma for retro games....

I just name a publication that covers only games over 10 years old. Mostly one 20-30 years
Even the games with 8bit graphics still have a HUGE following. Search on ebay for the great giana sisters. Its popular enough to be worth thousands of pounds, due to so many collectors wanting it. People still buy tonnes of games such a Lunar Lander on the vetrex. Many of these games are simpler than MUDs, and some less enjoyable.

Also i suggest against stock photos. Anybody can get them. I mean, just go the forums i said above, and see if anybody will do graphics for you, be them 3D or 2D for the use in a game, and you have a good chance of someone saying yes. And you'll have 100% original graphics as well.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by plamzi If someone can play your game with a text-only client, then it's a text-based game, even if someone else can play it with a hybrid client. Many people may disagree with that, but the reasons they do are either because they are purists (people who not only want to experience the world as text, but who also want everyone else to experience it that way) or because they are looking for an excuse to do nothing, or both.

I disagree with that definition as well, but not for either of the reasons you listed. The situation simply isn't that clear-cut. Take zClient for example:

"With help from Foole on auth and the A9 packet zite created the first and only alternative wow client. It was text based and worked in retail around 1.3 or so. You could create a character, delete characters, log in, move around in the world, interact with vendors, cast spells, open chests, instance, party, chat, attacking, tracking other players, and various other things. It had the ability to be easily scripted to automate tasks and could be used as a bot. It progressed quickly and was squashed by blizzard just as fast."

Does that make World of Warcraft a text-based game? What about Second Life?

"METAbolt is an open source (fully accessible using JAWS) messenger type application (text client) for the metaverse (virtual worlds). It has most of the functions that a viewer has but just not the graphics"

And then there muds like Archons of Avenshar, which is clearly a text-based mud with a custom client - but because it can only be played through its client, which includes a small amount of graphics, by your definition it would no longer be classified as text-based. In fact you could take any mud and block people from connecting unless they use MUSHclient with a simple GUI plugin, but I would still consider the mud text-based.

[plamzi]

Originally Posted by ForgottenMUD Thanks for the link. This website has a few nice pictures (such as this Elf Warrior Argues - Free Stock Photos & Images - 4433348 | StockFreeImages.com) however they cannot be used in a MUD project. From Terms and Conditions: "This license is awarded to the account owner (person or organization). This is a one-person license and can be used only by the account owner or his employee, for the company's own projects or clients and cannot be transmitted to another party. If the image is to be used by more employees, each of them should acquire a separate license. None of our images may be resold or redistributed by any means, or made available for redistribution or resale by a third party without StockFreeImages's separate written consent." Same terms for Dreamstime.

I think you need to read up on legalese a bit. "Resold or redistributed" means that you can't, e. g. print posters of these images and re-sell them, or start a clone site and sell the same images to other parties, conferring the same rights. You can, as the license states, use these images as part of your own commercial project, with your own clients, like in a computer game that you can charge your clients for. They do require a link in the credits, but that's not much to ask for.

Originally Posted by KaVir I disagree with that definition as well, but not for either of the reasons you listed. The situation simply isn't that clear-cut. Take zClient for example: "With help from Foole on auth and the A9 packet zite created the first and only alternative wow client. It was text based and worked in retail around 1.3 or so. You could create a character, delete characters, log in, move around in the world, interact with vendors, cast spells, open chests, instance, party, chat, attacking, tracking other players, and various other things. It had the ability to be easily scripted to automate tasks and could be used as a bot. It progressed quickly and was squashed by blizzard just as fast." Does that make World of Warcraft a text-based game? What about Second Life? "METAbolt is an open source (fully accessible using JAWS) messenger type application (text client) for the metaverse (virtual worlds). It has most of the functions that a viewer has but just not the graphics" And then there muds like Archons of Avenshar, which is clearly a text-based mud with a custom client - but because it can only be played through its client, which includes a small amount of graphics, by your definition it would no longer be classified as text-based. In fact you could take any mud and block people from connecting unless they use MUSHclient with a simple GUI plugin, but I would still consider the mud text-based.

It's actually pretty clear to me what constitutes text-based and what doesn't in all the edge cases you mentioned. But it's really not a topic I care enough about. For example, I'll be totally fine with everyone in this community (as opposed to only half the people so far) calling my game a non-MUD. Just like I'm fine with TMC not listing my game under "Graphical MUDs" but listing World of Warcraft as one.

I suggest we stay focused on the topic of modernizing MUDs, rather than on who considers what to be a true MUD.