Subject: Re: MOO + gaming system[s]

From: Arthur Chandler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1993 15:55:25 -0700

Irate? No one irate over here. Just trying to address the question of
adding MUD-type environments to MOOs, which seem to me to be related, but
heading in different directions.
  The very header of this thread says a lot: No one would say MUD + gaming
systems, as if they were distinct. But a MOO seems to be more socially
oriented, a MUD more fantasies of spellcasting and killing in a fantasy world.
  Attend a meeting of the Netoric Group at MediaMOO, with their discussion
of strategies for using computers to teach composition. Now imagine such a
session in a MUD. MOOs clearly grew out of MUDs; but the dungeon aspect is
being displaced by other kinds of interactions.
  Is a MOO "better" than a MUD? I wouldn't say so. Depends on what you
want out of real-time interaction with other people. Are they different,
and evolving in different directions? I would say so.Is adding an RPG area
to a MOO, as Opal seems to be doing, a good thing? They clearly think it
is, and more power to them. My only concern is that, if you're trying to
develop a MOO with other kinds of object-oriented building and/or more
RL-type social interaction, then the addition of an RPG (MUD-like) area
might turn out to be a drain on your resources.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1993 09:46:19 -0700

> >    Isn't there a danger that a MOO could be turned into a MUD by the
> 
> You mean lose its object-orientation?

most combat/sorcery MUDs out there are already object oriented.  some would
argue that the OO they've had for years (like found in LPMud) is a better
model of true OO ... multiple inheritance, none of this permissions bits
nonsense, etc.

of course, these non-dynamic drivers have their own problems, but the
implicit attitudes of superiority that many Mooers exude is not justified
by any conceptually revolutionary aspects of the programming environment.

-dave