Armageddon with a graphical engine instead of MUD - Interested?

[Archbaron]

I'm pretty sure this was a hit and run.

I would only wonder why he's been registered for so long. It would make more sense if he registered right before his post.

[Gunnerblaster]

I would only wonder why he's been registered for so long. It would make more sense if he registered right before his post.

He's been watching, from the shadows...

Waiting for the opportune moment to strike...

[musashi]

I prefer to believe that he was just a nice person who was trying to offer up an idea he thought was cool and wanted to share with other people ... we just don't like it.

Don't feel discouraged though, we're just a bit possessive of our beloved, bloodthristy ginka.

[Angela Christine]

The people in NWN scare me.    If you zoom way in, you see their mask-like faces bobbing, expressionless, staring into your soul.

[Archbaron]

The people in NWN scare me.    If you zoom way in, you see their mask-like faces bobbing, expressionless, staring into your soul.

And their eyes are like two demon crotches on the face: disturbing and something you wish never existed or was even brought up in a casual GDB conversation.

[jhunter]

I would never want to see Arm turn into a graphical game. I wouldn't mind if someone created a graphical RPI though. Definitely not using NWN, which personally I thought was pretty lame.

[gobbledygookie]

1) I was registered for so long because as I said - I played here. I also had another account back in the days (Spango or Spazmo), couldn't relog with it from some reason, so my registration date should even be minus a year. I've always liked this concept.

2) To suggest it would be like World of Warcraft is misreading my suggestion, it would simply be Armageddon with graphics, same ruleset applies. And with text triggers, we can still throw in all the details you like.

3) To suggest it's a "hit and run" with this topic only being on for a day is also ridiculous, are you familiar with sleeping?

-----

Well, I love it NWN, and I love graphics, this suggestion was made thinking you guys have simply never thought about the "what if", trying to take Arm a step further. But clearly you don't see it as step further. Then, I'm sorry if I offended you by suggesting that non-graphics is "lesser" gameplay.

staggerlee - you can add as much text as you want on top of the graphics, it's not a problem.

SMuz - There's no better medium for RPG building. Unless you're thinking of the moving oil picture known as NWN2, but I won't get into the "why" unless that is what you're thinking. You could be thinking of "HeroEngine" - Sadly, I don't have the 1 million $ it takes to buy it.

Anyway, I clear see you guys are well into MUD's and love it, so I apologize, if I knew how much you love it I wouldn't have bothered. My main issue is with "RP intensity", and visuals help my intensity feel. I guess we just see it differently huh? That's okay, I just love visuals myself.

Well, I'm not here to convince you NWN is better, or that RP with visuals is, or downplay the idea of MUD's, again, sorry if it seemed offensive in any way, may your MUD and MUDs live on! At least you guys are educating me as to your nature which I've always wondered about really. I'll try to see how I can mould my project to be more appealing, anyway.

Thank you,

-Lester

[spicemustflow]

Hey, you're Spazmo from RPGcodex?

Anyway, if we forget that NWN allows for small, bland maps, HUGE swords, non existent variety in character models and so on, your idea would still be shitty. Imagine how stifling it would be if we had to choose between predefined heads and torsos etc. In this case a picture doesn't speak anything compared to words.

[DustMight]

I would be interested to play a graphical "Arm based" game just for the fun of it, but it would never take priority over nice gray text with black background that I now enjoy.

I would more seriously consider it if the entire staff (or the big wigs at least) were behind it because after years (too many to mention) I trust their world-ken.

Interesting idea though.

[zanthalandreams]

Rar!  Someone likes this game concept in a way not standard to our enjoyment!  Rend and gnash and snarl mightily!

I say go for it.  If it is good and awesome and fun, then you have made the world happier.  I can't stand NWN, though, so probably won't be one for it.   (Though, if they ever birthed out a DarkSun-themed NWN, I would have been after that like a dog on a dropped biscuit.)

[gobbledygookie]

spicemustflow - first off there are many headsets with custom content. Secondly, you can write "character description", so the headset is simply the closest visual represetation of what your char looks like. And no - I'm not that Spazmo but I know him from way before RPGCodex, when he was still posting like a maniac on worldofwar.net, funny guy. I've stole his nickname on occasion...small cyberworld after all, eh?

Anyway, many of you are plain wrong that visuals supercedes text, it in no way does, rather it adds to text, you can write just as much text as you want to describe characters, areas, items, etc.

[musashi]

I would be worried that trying to blend text and graphics together in such a way would create a rather akward interface, moreso than having simply one or the other.

[Nyr]

We're in the process of building a new iteration of Armageddon called Armageddon Reborn.  I'd rather not be distracted by the prospect of any sort of graphical addition to Armageddon as it is presently or as it will be at this point, as it would require tremendous amounts of additional work as well as even more staff.   It's possible it would require a new machine to manage this, if not more than one.  The idea of a world like Armageddon with graphics is thought-provoking, but with present technology, it would fall miles short of the creativity possible with textual descriptions and the power of the imagination.  In addition, there are limitations imposed by having a completely volunteer staff.  Latency creates another problem, even though broadband and wireless access has increased exponentially since the inception of MUDs.  While my story is likely different from most others, I skipped most MMORPGs due to lack of a reliable and fast internet connection, and I have grown to appreciate the medium of text even after the convenience of a high speed connection.

These are just a few reasons why this probably would not work with the way that Armageddon is set up, staffed, and played.  Even without going into the realm of graphical advancement of the game's genre, we still have unexplored avenues and directions that can be sought out while using text.

[LoD]

Anyway, many of you are plain wrong that visuals supercedes text, it in no way does, rather it adds to text, you can write just as much text as you want to describe characters, areas, items, etc.

The issue is that, for many, the visuals would detract from the experience because they would never quite match up with the vision they have of their character in their mind.  If they emote sauntering over toward a table, and breathing a heavy sigh as they slump into a chair -- the visual is never going to recreate that movement correctly.  Even if you can emote that in a some text cell while your CGI character is woodenly walking over toward the bar to stand closer to it, the image on the screen is going to be in conflict with the action of the text.

The visuals on the screen will be in constant disagreement with the movement, freedoms, and images that are possible through our imagination, and that is a huge deterrent and put-off from playing in that medium.  If you say that the visuals help get you excited about the game, then my opinion is that you never really had a good opportunity to truly experience Armageddon, because I have never felt the same levels of adrenaline rushing through my body, anxiety over being in a given situation, satisfaction at achieving something rewarding, or taken away the same depth of stories from any graphical video game.

It isn't just about preferences -- "I like graphics vs. text."  It's about the entire environment and what you can achieve without graphics versus with them.  The text environment allows you freedoms that will never be possible in a graphical universe.  Never.  The subtleties and the ability to marry together complex movement, emotion, and interaction through a hugely diverse and complex language are simply out of graphic's league -- they cannot compete.  The equivalent live graphics allow about as much subtlety and complexity as cardboard cutout does to a live human being.

That isn't to say you shouldn't pursue whatever you enjoy, and try to make a game for other people who enjoy the graphics (or NWN) as much as you do -- but it's just important to realize what you're asking so that you can also understand where people are coming from when they react strongly.

-LoD

[brytta.leofa]

We have to take this as a starting point for any such idea: the text interface is never going away. 

I'm very much in favor of experimentation with nontraditional clients that are isomorphic to the current interface.  Plenty of things, in my opinion, aren't really optimal about a plain text interface, starting with the fact that I have no textual sense of direction. But alternative clients mustn't provide a special advantage or disadvantage, and players should be able to switch easily from ArmGUI to text and back without major confusion.

A much simpler idea that NWNing Armageddon would be to build a web-based client that automatically loaded area-appropriate flavorful images: a pencil-sketch of a busy night at the Gaj behind your terminal area, for instance.

[gobbledygookie]

If they emote sauntering over toward a table, and breathing a heavy sigh as they slump into a chair -- the visual is never going to recreate that movement correctly.

Of course, no game will do that, that's why you textually emote it same way you would in a MUD. No problem.

Role-players always consider the text first, visuals second, even if the graphics is in constant disagreement, because we realize there are visual limitations, but that doesn't mean we need to take visuals out of the equation altogether!

You can easily have both without one taking away from the other, if you think otherwise then I don't know what to say, I've role-played in MUD's and NWN, I haven't noticed that MUD's details or role-players are any better *shrugs* - it depends on the gameworld, I can write a page-length text to an area if I don't feel the visuals represent it correctly, and same with characters and items. (though NWN1 has so much community-contributed costume content, it's hardly a problem, but I often do it anyway)

Well, anyway, I'm not here trying to make you feel that visuals are better, but claiming that it takes away is plain silly - maybe it's something with your psyche? It never took anything away from me or my role-play. I've also seen the sentiment that you're waiting for the right game, and that some of you will entertain the idea of graphics+Armageddon - well, you might have to wait for a while, because NWN is the king of RPG-building at the moment, though the best RPGbuilder or MMORPG-builder technically is HeroEngine which costs 1 million $... *shrugs* I've no idea what would be "good enough" for you, will you even be alive to see it? 

I'll be revamping my concept, but I thank you all for your feedback and seeing how you think.

-Lester

[mansa]

Here's a concept I was working with:



It would require a specific java mud client - which I'm sure someone could whip up in 4 years.
(i've stolen ideas from BatMUD)

[mansa]

Latency creates another problem, even though broadband and wireless access has increased exponentially since the inception of MUDs.  While my story is likely different from most others, I skipped most MMORPGs due to lack of a reliable and fast internet connection, and I have grown to appreciate the medium of text even after the convenience of a high speed connection.

Side Point:
People still play WoW & NWN on dial up.  It's not an issue.

[Mechafish]

Text allows for broader diversity. You can do far more with language than you can with graphics, it allows for artistic depiction and creativity, writing skill,
and interpretation and imagination on the part of the reader.

That's so true.  That's why my friend got me into Armageddon!  That's is the main point of all MUD's; they let you to use your imagination.  I have played WoW and I haven't gotten into my main character (who was a Troll hunter) because almost all of the others looked the same.

[brytta.leofa]

Here's a concept I was working with:
...
It would require a specific java mud client - which I'm sure someone could whip up in 4 years.

Java or AJAX.  But I like it.

Another (mostly unrelated) thing worth considering in a client development would be to go to an http or https tunnel rather than using straight telnet.  'Twould pretty nearly eliminate firewall/snoopage problems for folks.

[staggerlee]

Here's a concept I was working with:
...
It would require a specific java mud client - which I'm sure someone could whip up in 4 years.

Java or AJAX.  But I like it.

Another (mostly unrelated) thing worth considering in a client development would be to go to an http or https tunnel rather than using straight telnet.  'Twould pretty nearly eliminate firewall/snoopage problems for folks.

Assuming it was cross platform and well implemented, I'd be fine with something like that. But I find adding a GUI usually just makes for an uglier, buggier, platform specific interface.  If that's what we're getting, I'd be vehemently against it.

As it stands I'm really not sure your proposal adds enough to be worth the time for coding.  Other concerns include that it might be a move in the wrong direction, or if not, that it may give new players the idea that the MUD is more of an adventure game than a roleplaying environment.

It also dramatically decreases screen space, and that would adversely affect formatting and spam. Unless you want me to set up dual monitors to play Arm on, which is uh, well, a nice idea in theory I guess.

[Nyr]

I think I might have implied it in my last post, but yes--I think that we will be waiting a long time if we want a good graphical interface with an RPI like Armageddon.  Until then, we have text options that haven't been explored yet.

You can easily have both without one taking away from the other, if you think otherwise then I don't know what to say, I've role-played in MUD's and NWN, I haven't noticed that MUD's details or role-players are any better *shrugs* it depends on the gameworld, I can write a page-length text to an area if I don't feel the visuals represent it correctly, and same with characters and items.

The chief problem I have with this concept is that it can't be easily had.  It would require a lot of staff work that we could be using for something else, like Armageddon Reborn. In addition, I don't think that there is a graphical game out there that can even halfway compare to the role-play within an RPI.  Not all MUDs have the same caliber of role-play; role-playing in one MUD does not equal an experience in another MUD.

[Marauder Moe]

It's hard to be immersed in something when your inputs regarding it are telling you two different things.  The text may say "emote lazily leans against the wall, watching the tavern patrons with an slight smirk" but the NWN engine shows my character standing rigidly kind of near the wall and staring ahead blankly.  I would much rather spend more of my mental energy imagining something to fill in the blanks than trying to ignore what my eyes see plainly.

That's how graphics detract from text.

[manonfire]

I play Armageddon to create my -own- visuals, not look at someone else's.

[LoD]

Of course, no game will do that, that's why you textually emote it same way you would in a MUD. No problem.

Why should I struggle through a muddled visual-text hybrid environment when the text environment is superior in almost every single way?  The point is that visual mediums will never be good enough to replace the experience we're describing that can  be found in a purely textual environment.

Visuals don't allow for interpretation.  What one person sees, everyone sees.  Text environments allow for interpretation, and people's perception of how a given area, person, weapon, animal, movement, or expression can differ from player to player.  These people are looking for an experience that you cannot get out of a movie or video game; an experience that is made possible by your mind individually interpreting and visualizing every word according to your personal perceptions of shapes, textures, colors, smells, sounds, and other sensory information developed over your entire lifetime.  That isn't possible with the visual medium that you describe, and it's one of the primary reasons why books and textual environments will always exist, and always attract a certain type of person.

My question is if....

Role-players always consider the text first, visuals second, even if the graphics is in constant disagreement...

I can write a page-length text to an area if I don't feel the visuals represent it correctly, and same with characters and items.

...then why would you want to introduce visuals into the equation?  If they are always inferior and needing to be further refined, overridden with descriptions, or if people are always going to consider text first -- what do you glean from the wooden and lifeless world of the visual medium when considering a home for the best RP experience possible?

I realize that you enjoy NVN and that you're impressed by what they've accomplished, but I could sit here and ramble off hundreds or thousands of images NVN could never convey without text.  And I feel that visuals only serve as noise to the message pure textual environments can carry, and, for that reason, I wouldn't ever want to play a game that tried to combine the two.  It would lose all of the things that make the text game special and unique without adding anything of value.

I enjoy visual games, and I enjoy text-oriented games.  I also enjoy largely virtual games like tabletop role-playing games.  Each of them provide a different type of environment, different set of advantages/disadvantages, and different range of experiences.  None of them is superior to the other, they're just different.

And I appreciate the differences of Armageddon MUD.

-LoD