Web-based MU poll

SG · Mar 7, 2017, 7:17 PM

I think that'd be a cool thing to see.

Ghost · Mar 7, 2017, 7:20 PM

Seeing as how I've used FS3 and your log cleaner(and think both are great), if anyone can pull this off, it's you.

Go 4 it.

Three-Eyed Crow · Mar 7, 2017, 7:23 PM

I'd love to see it tried. The main hurdle for MUing for a lot of people is the need to plonk yourself down in one place for 3 hours to play. And the horror that is trying to MU on a mobile phone. Something that mitigates those would be really exciting.

I'd be curious about the logistics (how do you handle a GM'd scene when you need to call for rolls, and such?) but I'm honestly surprised there's not a more streamlined platform for this now, given the popularity of text-based RP on platform like Tumblr that're DEEPLY unsuited for it.

Arkandel · Mar 7, 2017, 7:24 PM

@faraday Yes, absolutely.

lordbelh · Mar 7, 2017, 7:25 PM

@faraday I would.

Cupcake · Mar 7, 2017, 7:25 PM

I'd give it a go.

lordbelh · Mar 7, 2017, 7:26 PM

I mean, it still requires the game to be good. But I started out rping on a web interface. I'd not mind returning to it.

faraday · Mar 7, 2017, 7:37 PM

@Glitch figured out the problem with the BB code, so trying this again...

Would you play a MU that was web-only?

I'm not talking about the sort of telnet-lite portal that Evennia, AresMUSH, SR: Denver and various other games have added to their websites. Nor am I talking about straight play-by-post forum game. This would be a MU* style of play, but completely designed and optimized for the web - a sort of Frankenstein mashup of Slack/Discord live chat interface and a MU* game wiki.

Arkandel · Mar 7, 2017, 7:50 PM

@faraday You won't get real answers from here, only an indication of existing trends.

Basically if you give the most traditional user a good, easy to use web interface with the tools and conveniences that's impossible to do on telnet then they will almost definitely switch (especially when all their friends do). But if the game itself was hard to use, especially in its early stages when the featureset isn't as complete as MUSH-code that's taken years to develop and refine, even enthusiasts would have doubts.

In other words, it depends a whole lot on the implementation.

Monogram · Mar 7, 2017, 7:49 PM

I dunno. Yeah, tel-net clients might be ancient in terms of stuff, but it's not like there's anything inherently wrong with them. Or maybe that's just a thought of 'if it's not broke don't fix it' kind of thing.

I like my MU clients and playing something from an inherently a browser window just seems a little strange to me. That could also be me sitting on my porch and shaking my cane at things.

I'm not saying it would be a /horrible/ change, but at the same time, I dunno if it's something that I would use. Already use my browser for enough stuff as it is.

Arkandel · Mar 7, 2017, 7:58 PM

@Monogram said in Web-based MU poll:

I dunno. Yeah, tel-net clients might be ancient in terms of stuff, but it's not like there's anything inherently wrong with them. Or maybe that's just a thought of 'if it's not broke don't fix it' kind of thing.

Until you try to put a word in italics. Or display an image for a room. Or allow context-sensitive menus by clicking on character names to perform actions on them. Or having a UI for personal messages like Hangouts' as opposed to pages taking up half of your screen when you page several people just to display their names.

Or, you know, showing a newbie how to roleplay online. They go from polished interfaces to a black screen and a command line interface for CGen that requires 'a special program' to access the game at all.

There's only nothing wrong because we're used to it.

Already use my browser for enough stuff as it is.

I don't mean to tell you you are wrong, I just don't understand that reasoning. Can you explain?

Three-Eyed Crow · Mar 7, 2017, 8:06 PM

One of the things I like about my MU client actually is the sense of separation, weirdly enough. I generally play with Firefox open and a bunch of tabs going but I can also...not. I can just cut myself off a bit, like I do when I'm playing any other sort of video game, and open nothing but the client. It's kind of nice and feels less busy.

I'm not sure if this is what @Monogram is talking about and I can certainly just use my browser for less BS at any given time. This is one of those things that's the fault of the user rather than the fault of the thing itself. But it is one of those ephemeral things that makes me rather like having a separate piece of software that I play on, even if I recognize that clients are alienating to newbs.

ETA: That said, I'm still excited about the idea of a game that's entirely web-based. It feels like the way forward and absolutely would cut down the barrier for entry that's keeping new players out of the hobby. I'm just trying to put my finger on why I like my MU client, in addition to all the centralization for real-time RP stuff I think telnet games do quite well.

faraday · Mar 7, 2017, 8:04 PM

@Monogram said in Web-based MU poll:

I dunno. Yeah, tel-net clients might be ancient in terms of stuff, but it's not like there's anything inherently wrong with them.

Like @Arkandel said, it has a lot of limitations. And there are technical reasons why it kind of sucks.

But for me the larger issue is around usability. Plop any modern gamer in front of a web app and they'll figure it out. You can set up a website or blog in minutes. Contrast that with explaining MU commands to someone who's never had to use a command-line interface. Or try to tell them how to install and configure a game using Penn/Tiny. It's a night and day difference.

That said, everyone has their preferences. I was in the "pry my MU client out of my dead fingers" category for a long long time so I'm not judging anyone for liking the old way. Just curious if there's enough interest in something different to justify the effort.

Apos · Mar 7, 2017, 8:36 PM

Pure command line only is too high a bar for the vast majority of current generation gamers. I'm in a spot where I have more people than I can really handle comfortable at the moment anyways but like, I haven't even bothered trying to talk non-MU rp buddies into trying out the game. I absolutely would have if we had context sensitive menus, right click functionality, etc. On the veeeeeeeeery long term to-do.

lordbelh · Mar 7, 2017, 8:41 PM

It took effort to convince me that MUing was worth sticking with. When I saw how horribly backwards and dated looking everything was, I felt like throwing my hands up and quitting. And that was what, 5-6 years ago now? Its even more dated now.

Ghost · Mar 7, 2017, 8:44 PM

So, in theory, website support plus web-interface could allow for easy access to character sheets, dice rolling systems, visuals, etc. I think the major question, @faraday is: "Are you recreating something that already exists, like Roll20?"

What about this project would be different from just running a mush out of Roll20 and tying in discord chat? I think there's some things that could be done to revolutionize the MU format, but I think the only thing Roll20 doesn't have that MU does is a better pose-based environment. Roll20's chat interface is very MiRC.

I'd just hate to see you do a whole lot of work and then come to the realization that there are some current online tabletops like Roll20/D20 Pro have tooks for this sort of stuff.

Monogram · Mar 7, 2017, 8:48 PM

@Three-Eyed-Crow said in Web-based MU poll:

One of the things I like about my MU client actually is the sense of separation, weirdly enough. I generally play with Firefox open and a bunch of tabs going but I can also...not. I can just cut myself off a bit, like I do when I'm playing any other sort of video game, and open nothing but the client. It's kind of nice and feels less busy.

I'm not sure if this is what @Monogram is talking about and I can certainly just use my browser for less BS at any given time. This is one of those things that's the fault of the user rather than the fault of the thing itself. But it is one of those ephemeral things that makes me rather like having a separate piece of software that I play on, even if I recognize that clients are alienating to newbs.

ETA: That said, I'm still excited about the idea of a game that's entirely web-based. It feels like the way forward and absolutely would cut down the barrier for entry that's keeping new players out of the hobby. I'm just trying to put my finger on why I like my MU client, in addition to all the centralization for real-time RP stuff I think telnet games do quite well.

This is more or less what I was trying to say. With my browser, say, Firefox or Chrome, I tend to have a bunch of tabs open, and having a MU browser tab would only add to that. I like how they're both separate from each other. And even something as small as how my icon lights up in my menu bar telling me I have new activity.

That being said, I'm aware of how clients are can simply be a gate for getting new people into the hobby. Back in 2006, when i first started MUing, I can remember how hard a time I had getting used to Simple MU at first. There was a learning curve involved. That being said, it didn't take long to get used to it, but looking back now I can see how it can be even more so, considering that tel-net stuff is bordering on archaic if it's not already.

While I would say that I would be willing to play on a browser-based MU, I doubt it would be my top option. Likely, I'll stick to tel-net based clients and I have no illusions that one day that might be phased out entirely.

Y'know, until we all get plugs put into the base of our skulls and start wholly living in VR.

faraday · Mar 7, 2017, 8:55 PM

@Ghost said in Web-based MU poll:

What about this project would be different from just running a mush out of Roll20 and tying in discord chat? I think there's some things that could be done to revolutionize the MU format, but I think the only thing Roll20 doesn't have that MU does is a better pose-based environment. Roll20's chat interface is very MiRC.

There are lots of tools out there for online RP. Roll20, Storium, PBP forums with various plugins for dice and/or character sheets, etc. People RP on Twitter and Tumblr for goodness' sake, so I'm sure you could cobble together something vaguely MU-like with the right hodgepodge of tools.

But I haven't seen one that really captures what I feel like is the essence of MU-style RP in a way that would be accessible to veteran MU players. If there's one out there, I'd love to hear about it and save myself a lot of work

Ghost · Mar 7, 2017, 8:58 PM

@faraday One other concern: IP/Licensing. I know the last place I heard of being slapped with a cease-and-desist was a Matrix MU around the time the Matrix Online was about to release, but I sometimes wonder if the reason we don't see a lot more of this(because, let's face it, some MUs have a LOT of copyrighted material that isn't creative-commons in stored +help files, etc) is because the actual internet-side presence of this material isn't where it's stored.

I'm just throwing out things I think that may be relevant to the creation of said environment. It would probably be safest to use FS3 or other creative-commons IPs.