MU Soapbox

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Muxify
    • Mustard
    1. Home
    2. SparklesTheClown
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 5
    • Topics 44
    • Posts 670
    • Best 259
    • Controversial 2
    • Groups 2

    Posts made by SparklesTheClown

    • RE: UX: It's time for The Talk

      @Ganymede

      All of these things are a part of UX. UX means user experience.

      But also this does have plenty to do with MUDs and MUSHes and how people code things, because, again, things are frequently made needlessly complicated in MUSHes. The fact that so many things need mountains of documentation is a design failure. Even if you do properly document something, needing like 4 files for one feature is a failure. How many video games have you played that actually required you to read the manual to understand the controls beyond a basic tutorial? And in very good games, beyond a level designed to act as a tutorial.

      Being text is no excuse for the extra difficulty, because, again, I've played plenty of MUDs where the barrier to entry was no where near as crazy as so many MUSHes with complicated syntax, despite the fact that MUDs often have significantly more complex code.

      posted in MU Code
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: UX: It's time for The Talk

      @Ganymede

      I'm talking about problems that have persisted across at least a few hundred games. Just because every game doesn't have atrocious syntax, doesn't mean most of them don't. And for every thing certain games do get right, then then make some other aspect of the code needlessly complicated.

      And, incidentally, compared to other ways in which code could be simplified? Yeah, actually, that +roll is more than I genuinely believe is necessary. There are layers of abstraction that are being entirely avoided for no reason. Hell, even before I played MU's, I created macros on Byond Tabletop that had higher levels of abstraction than that. So, yes, it is too tough, because it's not as simple as it could possibly be. If something is more complicated than it needs to be, it's too complicated. The answer is always yes, if something can be simpler.

      @Tempest

      I think a lot of the cultural differences can be chalked up to the importance that staff places on those things. I've said this many times, but those minor details matter. If staff treats everything as secondary and doesn't work it into the overall design and culture of their game, then the players are also going to treat those things as secondary and unimportant. It takes more than just saying "read the board", players have to want to do those things, and it's up to the creator to craft a game in which players want to do all of those things.

      All of those MUDs you're talking about have staff who place an emphasis on all of those things, and crafted a game where reading that stuff enriches your experience rather than seems like a chore. This is not an impossible or difficult thing to do on a MUSH, creators just choose not to because so many refuse to see the importance in detail.

      posted in MU Code
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • UX: It's time for The Talk

      Listen, I know that I'm not some ridiculously experienced coder, but this is a talk that needs to happen. I decided to make this post after I responded to a comment Thenomain made.

      For years, since I even got into this hobby, I've noticed just really monstrously shitty design practices. One of the most grave shitty design practices is just what I can only describe as a complete disregard for UX design.

      Coders, time and time again, seem to code things that are simple to coders. Rather than simplifying the code or looking at a more efficient way to do things, they write like 4 help files on how to use one feature. I don't care what anyone says, 4 help files is a manual.

      Players should be focusing on ways to apply a tool, not spending forever figuring out how to use it. It should be in some way intuitive how a piece of code works after a few short lines of explanation. Anything further than that should be advanced functionality that builds on top of the basic functionality, and this itself should also be intuitive, not confusing syntax that takes forever to remember.

      I'm sure plenty of people are gonna go "But that's impossible!", especially considering how many times I've talked about how complicated a piece of code was, and a coder was like "That seems fine to me". Well, no shit, you're who coded it.

      To anyone thinking like that, I say play literally any MUD. Even the most shitty MUD has common sense UX. You can typically get basic functionality with very minimal file reading, and more advanced functionality over time, as you need it, and then it just becomes intuitive.

      Where initiating combat in the average MUSH with a combat system requires knowing like a million goddamned pieces of syntax, in a MUD it's like "attack <thing>", then something like "kick <thing>". And more advanced things build on top of this common sense syntax and functionality. Some go so far as to even have an intuitive text interface that makes it even simpler, where the average MUSH requires you to know even more syntax to do something like check your health or whatever.

      The point is, the more stuff you're gonna pile into a game, the lower the difficulty of actually using and figuring out how to use it needs to be. Think about how someone who has never been in a MU before would interact with your code. My first MU was Dragon Ball Evolution (they named it that before the shitty movie came out), a MUD. Everything made sense after a very short while.

      I didn't get into MUSHes until possibly nearly a year later, because the barrier to entry just seemed massively higher. Huge, intimidating apps, the idea that some stranger was going to tell me that I sucked and can't be in their game (this is not the case, obviously, but outside of MUing the RP communities are far more brutal). Syntax just seemed like this crazy confusing mess to figure out, where in a MUD I never really thought about it. In a MUD I focused on what to do with the tool I was given, I didn't spend forever trying to figure out how to use it.

      I'm not shitting on MUSHes and saying "Fuck you guys I'm going back to MUDs", what I am saying is that we can do better, and there is precedent that we can do better. Are we going to let MUDs beat us?

      Do you realize that in MUDs they think that all people in MUSHes do is sit around is talk, and that we don't RP? They have the same stereotype about us that we have of them.

      Don't take that shit laying down! Let's show that we can do better.

      I'm ready for the flames.

      pixel flame

      posted in MU Code
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning

      @Thenomain

      The lack of importance on UX that so many coders seem to have is why the vast majority of "finished" systems we have in this hobby are a complete mess.

      I think that if you need tons of files on how to use a tool rather than what to use a tool for, it's a design failure.

      That said, I have no idea what's being discussed, I just came in here to say that.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      I put great consideration into this post.

      hip memes

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      @Thenomain

      I don't think the purpose of a chat hangout is necessarily to carry on extended discussion of forum stuff (though that would obviously happen), and more just chilling out when not having extended discussion of forum stuff.

      I also think it has the potential to allow people to interact with each other in a way that adds a more real-time human element, perhaps enhancing forum interaction by having people more casually interact in a way that isn't a carefully considered forum post.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?

      @Bobotron said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

      • The Secret Circle (alternative magic-based)

      Someone did this, it was gaining a lot of traction, then they banned TS and everyone left.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      @Auspice said in MSB MU*?:

      I already know I will regret asking, but...

      Homie Bear Slices?

      Well, apparently only hours before I met her, she was trying to think of a name for fans of her stream. Someone suggested Homie G Slices, and someone explained that the G was for gangster.

      She thought it sounded too violent and scary, so she decided against what I can assume was literally everyone's better judgment, that her fans are now called Homie Bear Slices, because she likes bears.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      People keep telling me to get Discord.

      A Japanese woman who I thought was my soul mate but is actually middle-aged and married with children wants me to get Discord for her Homie Bear Slices, so I might do that.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      @Thenomain Well, I think 8bit MUSH and MUS*H count, but who knows. I don't really hang out on any.

      I think a MSB MU would be useful for a community hangout that's less effort than making a forum post.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      @Thenomain Do it.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: MSB MU*?

      If someone makes it, I'll come.

      Natsumi Taguchi from Kobushi Factory

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?

      I personally think it's a mistake to look at the hobby as people aging, since I pretty much constantly see newer and younger people entering.

      I think it's about what you make and how you make it. And most of what it seems like people are making right now are sandboxes. Just because people are making a certain type of game, doesn't necessarily mean that's what the majority of people want or are going to play. Sandboxes just happen to be easy to run, and if you do it in the right way, you get lots of players.

      I've harped on ways to design a game to get a specific type of player you want forever. People almost never design a game for the kind of player they want, I can count the number of times I've seen this out of hundreds of games on one hand. So if you make a canon game, a WoD game, or whatever, and don't get players who want to invest in the metaplot, it's most likely because the game isn't set up and run in a way to attract the sorts of players who would invest. You see this all the time.

      I've mentioned in another thread, I forget which, that minor things matter and go a long way to creating a particular culture and community. More often than not, people say fuck those minor details, and people get the result that I've come to expect. United Heroes is an excellent example of building the game for the playerbase you want, and paying attention to the minor details, and, shock, they're succeeding.

      If you want to make one of these canon games work, then build it in a way that will actually work. Designing a MU isn't just a random gamble where you just throw stuff together and then hope for a result. Think back to all the MUs you've played and what impact that minor details, policy, and features had on the playerbase and culture. After you do that, start figuring out what features will get you the game that you want, then do it.

      I've never seen a game fail or succeed for no reason, or for whatever is the pessimistic flavor of the month reason that people are pointing out. There's always a bunch of specific reasons that you can pin down and replicate, and when people do pin down and replicate those reasons, either good or bad, they get the same result as the last people who did it, without fail. If you think that they don't, chances are you're overlooking a vital detail that differentiated the failed game from the successful game.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?

      @Ominous said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

      @Bobotron said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

      • Fullmetal Alchemist

      That would be interesting. I am surprised no one has tried it yet.

      FMA would make an incredible MU, but the execution would have to be absolutely goddamned flawless, in my opinion, with a metaplot and everything.

      I feel like these days, you see less and less metaplot. It'd be nice to see more of that, instead of this sandbox trend that I admittedly kind of loathe.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?

      @Bobotron said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

      MOAR!

      • Pokemon. A good Pokemon MU* could do fun things.

      I helped make a Pokemon MU* once. Of course I was younger and didn't know much back then, but I think the hard part is getting people to give a shit. I can't even remember what it was called! I made it with Khroan.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Angelic Layer MOO Staff

      @Mercutio said in Angelic Layer MOO Staff:

      @HelloProject
      That was Pueblo/UE. Based around the Pueblo / MXP type transmissions. PennMUSH only, last I recall.

      OH YEAH! Pueblo. I don't know why I thought MOO.

      posted in A Shout in the Dark
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Angelic Layer MOO Staff

      @Mercutio Oh, I thought it was a MOO because it encouraged using MOO client, if I recall correctly, due to having pictures.

      I'll PM you with my question. (Also I remember you)

      posted in A Shout in the Dark
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Angelic Layer MOO Staff

      @Seamus I feel like the game was called Angelic Layer MUSH but it was actually a MOO because ???.

      posted in A Shout in the Dark
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Angelic Layer MOO Staff

      @Auspice The only reason I remember my character names is because I'm one of those insane people who spend hours thinking of a name.

      posted in A Shout in the Dark
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • RE: Angelic Layer MOO Staff

      @Auspice Pretty sure there's only been one!

      posted in A Shout in the Dark
      SparklesTheClown
      SparklesTheClown
    • 1
    • 2
    • 16
    • 17
    • 18
    • 19
    • 20
    • 33
    • 34
    • 18 / 34