In my last post I asked what MUDs can offer players that they can’t get from more modern graphical virtual worlds. In order to answer this question we need to look at what makes MUDs unique.
The single biggest difference between MUDs and other virtual world platforms is the relative ease with which MUDs can be developed. While producing a quality MUD is still a large undertaking, the number of hours necessary to develop an equivalent graphical world is far greater and requires a wider range of skills.
MUDs can also be developed with free tools, and with hosting costs from only a few dollars a month they are far cheaper to produce and operate than graphical virtual worlds.
These facts have several important gameplay implications.
Low startup and operating costs mean MUDs can cater to minority genres and gameplay styles in ways which wouldn’t be commercially viable for games with greater costs to do.
New MUD features can often be developed by a single programmer in the space of an afternoon or a few days and major changes to the world can be accomplished simply by editing a text file. This enables MUDs to be far more responsive to player actions and allows for a degree of player influence over the game world that cannot be matched by graphical games.
This also holds true for player created content. While other virtual worlds are catching up in this area (e.g. Second Life, Metaplace, etc.) MUDs still lead the way when it comes to player created content. No other platform allows players to expand and modify the world as easily.
In part 3 I will offer my thoughts on the current state of MUDs and my predictions for the future of the platform.
bcdev.design.blog 