English flagItalian flagKorean flagChinese (Simplified) flagPortuguese flagGerman flagFrench flag
Spanish flagJapanese flagArabic flagRussian flagGreek flagDutch flagBulgarian flag
Czech flagCroat flagDanish flagFinnish flagHindi flagPolish flagRumanian flag
Swedish flagNorwegian flag     
By N2H
Welcome to Raph Koster's personal website: MMOs, gaming, writing, art, music, books.

MUD influence

June 27th, 2008

As part of the ongoing raking over the coals of Richard Bartle for saying the obvious (yes, you can tell what side I am on in those debates!), Steve Danuser says over at Moorgard.com » Sacred Cows

I get tired of people implying that today’s MMOs owe their entire existence to the MUDs of yesteryear. Sorry, I disagree. The gameplay style of EQ or WoW is obviously influenced by MUDs, but I propose that MMOs would have evolved anyway.

And Ryan Shwayder posts in comments saying

Ultima Online is a direct descendant of what MUD? I’m not saying it isn’t, I’m just saying that I don’t know what particular MUD had a profound influence on that game. It seems like the MMO industry was born of different influences; EverQuest from DikiMuds, Ultima Online from Ultima games. Not all MMOs have a lot of direct comparisons to MUDs, so I think he’s right that they’d exist whether MUDs did or not.

Well…

There’s little doubt that MMOs would have evolved anyway. In fact, they actually DID evolve anyway. MMOs were created simultaneously and independently by a dozen groups at once. The folks doing Meridian 59 did not know about the folks doing Kingdom of the Winds, and so on. Not to mention older antecedents like Habitat. MUDs, in fact, were also invented independently at least four times, as Bartle himself has stated many times over.

That said:

  • The early Everquest developers played Diku derivatives in the form of Sojourn and children muds such as Duris and Toril.
  • Early folks on Meridian 59 played Diku derivatives such as Worlds of Carnage.
  • The original core team on Ultima Online was a mix of two LP Mudders, a MUSH/MOOer, and a few Diku-folks. And one Ultima guy.
  • I could go on — The Realm and many others also had those sorts of antecedents.

The result? Today’s MMOs are mostly reskinned muds. It is very very hard to find an MMO that doesn’t have a direct comparison to a text world. Yes, even EVE, even A Tale in the Desert.

And, I must point out, even today much of the leadership behind the MMOs today is still from that “old guard” (though not necessarily from the mud world)the designers and executives of the mid-to-late 90’s are still the ones determining what you play in many ways, from Mark over at Mythic/EA to Damion, Rich, and Gordon over at Bioware, to Kim Taek-jin and the Garriotts at NCSoft…

If they had been invented independently, they would be different.

What did MMOs really bring to the table, designwise?

  • Greater sense of spatiality. This mostly affected aggro management, and it did make combat significantly richer.
  • More advanced raiding — it existed, but it lacked all of the support infrastructure that eventually popped up.
  • Much heavier use of instancing — it was a very unusual and rare technology back then.
  • Lots of cool support features — like, adding quest logs to quests, for example.
  • Dancing.
  • Pictures.

In the recent discussions, a lot of folks have cited stuff like WAR’s upcoming public quests as new, or the Tome of Knowledge. These people have clearly never played MUME. Or maybe not Everquest, which had public quests too. Or…

I think it’s easy to be dismissive of history, and say that it’s not relevant. I’m pretty sure I have heard a quote somewhere about the consequences of that. Moving forward without knowledge of the past is far more likely to result in going in circles. MMOs have removed more features from MUD gameplay than they have added, when you look at the games in aggregate.

The fact that people can cite things like “big boss battles in a public zone” or “really rich badge profiles and player stat tracking” as truly differentiating features mostly speaks to how narrow the scope of the field has gotten in the public’s mind. This is like arguing over whether scalloped bracing in acoustic guitars is a defining characteristic for all of music, when in fact it has zero relevance to MIDI controllers. By analogy, Bartle, like many of us, is arguing from the perspective of all music — all virtual worlds. And his detractors are people who only listen to indie rock from the Athens, GA, area circa 1989. All Richard is asking for is for someone to please play some jazz.

Failure to evolve more radically isn’t a flaw — in that sense, I agree completely with Moorgard. But then, I tend to think that all the current MMOs in the game industry are already the Old Guard relative to the new webby folks. I think the mudder crew is already the Older Guard anyway. So in a sense this is kind of like an argument between art rockers and disco musicians. :P

*

[?]
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

120 Responses to “MUD influence”

Jump to reader comments » | Leave a reply »

Trackbacks & Pingbacks
  1. MMO Clerks » Koster: MMOs removed more features from MUDs than they added wrote on

    [...] president, MetaPlace developer, and all-around-MMO-authority Raph Koster wrote up a blog post about the influence of MUDs on today’s graphical MMOs. The post is part of the broader, cross-blog discussion that began with our interview with Richard [...]

  2. Massively wrote on

    isn’t a flaw,” said Koster. He finished up by positing that all the current MMOs “are already Old Guard,” and that “the mudder crew is already the Older Guard. So in a sense this is kind of like an argument between art rockers and disco musicians.”Read| Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

  3. Wikilaw wrote on

    Raph Koster is one of those few members of the industry who is really outspoken and keeps in touch with the community and expresses his thoughts in a way that is accessible to anyone. It’s fitting that we share his argument here.On the topic of MMO’s evolving from MUDS:Theres little doubt that MMOs would have evolved anyway. In fact, they actually DID evolve anyway. MMOs were created simultaneously and independently by a dozen groups at once. The folks doing

  4. Raph Koster: MMOs versus MUDs : The Metaverse Journal - Australia’s Virtual World News Service wrote on

    [...] Raph Koster has been around long enough to know most virtual world history. He’s raised some interesting points about MUDs and MMOs, stating that the latter have “removed more features from MUD gameplay [...]

  5. MMODump.com » Blog Archive » Koster: MMOs removed more features from MUDs than they added wrote on

    [...] added:Areae president, MetaPlace developer, and all-around-MMO-authority Raph Koster wrote up a blog post about the influence of MUDs on today’s graphical MMOs. The post is part of the broader, cross-blog discussion that began with our interview with Richard [...]

  6. The Forge · The Ongoing Influence of MUDs wrote on

    [...] post here by Raph, countering some claims by some newer developers that MMOs don’t owe as much to text MUDs as [...]

  7. The influence of history - designers and gamers « A ding world wrote on

    [...] influence of history - designers and gamers Raph Koster posted an interesting blog entry related to the latest discussions that popped up regarding the Richard Bartle transcript and the [...]

  8. rascunho » Blog Archive » links for 2008-06-29 wrote on

    [...] Raph’s Website » MUD influence Not to mention older antecedents like Habitat. MUDs, in fact, were also invented independently at least four times, as Bartle himself has stated many times over. (tags: http://www.raphkoster.com 2008 mes5 dia28 at_home MUD Bartle raph_koster blog_post history games MMOG) [...]

  9. MMODump.com » Blog Archive » The Ongoing Influence of MUDs wrote on

    [...] post here by Raph, countering some claims by some newer developers that MMOs don’t owe as much to text MUDs as [...]

  10. To the Blogmobile! Atomic webservers to power. Typing fingers to speed. wrote on

    like many of us, is arguing from the perspective of all music all virtual worlds. And his detractors are people who only listen to indie rock from the Athens, GA, area circa 1989. All Richard is asking for is for someone to please play some jazz.Go read the whole thing. Very much worth it. Raphs in a particularly good place to support Richards arguments, of course, as hes working on Metaplace - which may, if it turns out right, allow all of us to play whatever

  11. Pithy Insightful Commentary « pΘtshΘt wrote on

    [...] Its called World of Warcraft.”  or somesuch (I’m too tired to link the quote).  Raph Koster has weighed in and said that MMOs left more features of MUDs behind than they implemented.  A [...]

  12. MMO, woher stammen wir? « geraintcb’s blog wrote on

    [...] in Juli 1, 2008 von geraintcb Eine interessante Diskussion findet derzeit auf der Seite von Raph Koster statt. Vereinfacht gesagt, es wird darüber diskutiert, was denn jetzt wovon der Vorreiter war, wer [...]

  13. GameRatty: Latest Articles wrote on

    or EA to make a conscious effort to make a game nobody wants to buy? Why complain about a game like Diablo 3 being developed, if we already know that millions of people will buy it and enjoy it? A few people might have preferred Blizzard to developa text MUD instead, but we all know that only a handful of people would have played it, even if the idea would certainly be original. Adam Smith said “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their

  14. Wolfshead Online » Blog Archive » Raph Koster on the Bartle Controversy wrote on

    [...] the fog of battle finally cleared, Raph Koster the resident Yoda and Zen master of virtual worlds weighed in on the Richard Bartle controversy. I knew it was just a matter of time before Raph would deposit [...]

  15. Tobold's MMORPG Blog wrote on

    or EA to make a conscious effort to make a game nobody wants to buy? Why complain about a game like Diablo 3 being developed, if we already know that millions of people will buy it and enjoy it? A few people might have preferred Blizzard to developa text MUD instead, but we all know that only a handful of people would have played it, even if the idea would certainly be original. Adam Smith said “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their

  16. Why permadeath is a nono - Page 7 - Mortal Online Forums wrote on

    [...] own dislikes or that of the marketeers is hard to tell… But in the current discussion about how MMOs have been dropping more MUD features than innovating new features themselves, it regularly comes up to debunk the ‘PvP is hardcore’ myth that surrounds PvP in MMOs. From MUDs [...]

  17. Ginnunga Online Gaming: Site Content => The News wrote on

    [...] experienced players”. Here are some more links that tie into this very amusing little discussion: http://www.raphkoster.com/2008/06/27/mud-influence/ http://www.moorgard.com/?p=235 http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2008/06/wow.html [...]

  18. OCD Entry: The MUD`s influence on MMO`s from Raph Koster @ WGFriends.com wrote on

    [...] to some degree to the discussion previously begun on MMOs vs the World. Read on!Quoted from Raph’s Website: As part of the ongoing raking over the coals of Richard Bartle for saying the obvious (yes, [...]

  19. Ravings | The Cesspit. wrote on

    [...] Diablo 3 was announced, Raph restates the obvious, and I find a correspondence between the two: Diablo was for RPGs a bit what WoW was for MMOs. Take [...]

  20. MUD’s Heritage to MMOs, a Short Sample | Altitis wrote on

    [...] Readers who pay attention to commentators writing about MMO design or industry questions at large may be familiar with Raph Koster’s statement: [...]

Reader Comments
  1. Erin said on

    It is an interesting conversation, and something of a broken logical progression. From a historical standpoint I think it is more supportable to say that had the current designers of modern MMOs not fallen in love with the interactive world context of MUDs, those modern MMOs would not exist in their current shapes.

    Some of us are still in love with MUDs, and deep down frustrated with modern graphical games for not being them. ;) While still enjoying the pretty.

  2. Scopique said on

    I remember way back when I was in high school, myself, and a friend of mine, would go SCUBA diving on the weekends. While we traveled, we discussed many things, and one day, we thought of how COOL it would be to have a computer game where the players were all connected to one another. Each person would control one avatar, and whatever happened in the world by way of conflict would be totally player generated.

    We had NEVER played MUDs, MOOs or MUSHes. I don’t even think we knew they EXISTED at that point. We had a solid background in C64 and Amiga CRPGs, as well as PnP games, so with that in mind, the existence of the early multiplayer games doesn’t seem to me to have really been NECESSARY for what we have today…except in that those who have started what we have today DID have the MUD/MOO/MUSH experience as well as the opportunity to take those early elements and turn them into something real…as opposed to two guys theorizing out of thin air.

  3. Morgan Ramsay said on

    Thanks for commenting on the… commentary. I had planned to post a rebuttal to Richard’s critics on my blog, but that “catastrophic hard drive failure” on the server was confirmed to have resulted in a total loss of data. I’ll have to find my old backups… Anyway, I’m heading out to an independent game developers’ meetup and will be back in a few. I’ll post my less formal rebuttal here instead at that time.

  4. John DeLancey said on

    This is like arguing over whether scalloped bracing in acoustic guitars is a defining characteristic for all of music, when in fact it has zero relevance to MIDI controllers. By analogy, Bartle, like many of us, is arguing from the perspective of all music — all virtual worlds. And his detractors are people who only listen to indie rock from the Athens, GA, area circa 1989. All Richard is asking for is for someone to please play some jazz.

    Amazingly well said, and this quote in particular drove it home. I agree whole-heartedly with Mr. Bartle’s and your take on this situation, though I cannot speak from a great deal of experience with the “MMO” industry as I’ve only ever played EQ and SWG, and then only for a short while in each.

    - John

  5. Tim said on

    I think the real issue is that Bartle is an opinionated person and comes off as such. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. He’s smart, he’s funny, he’s opinionated. He’s exactly whom you want to have on your panel to stir some controversy. It’s questionable if you want him on your board of advisers if the best he can do is express his thoughts in disparaging remarks or offer no constructive input.

    Enough of the “this is wrong”. Let’s hear some “this is right” or “what about doing it this way?”

  6. Eolirin said on

    Bartle does do that though Tim, just not always at the same as he’s lamenting the state of things. But more important than solving the problems, he’s trying to get people to look at them, and that’s the most constructive thing he can be doing until someone drops a load of money in his lap and says go make a game. Any diversification that we get going forward is going to come from a multitude of sources doing a multitude of things, but if no one’s *looking* at the status quo as if it’s an issue, nothing at all ever gets done.

    You don’t need to have the answers to pose the question, but if no one asks, nothing gets resovled.

    As to the rest of this, Raph is so spot on that I can’t understand how anyone that’s even looked into this stuff could think otherwise. Sure we’d have some sort of virtual world, that sort of thing would have indeed been inevitable. But it wouldn’t be what we have now, that’s for sure. Hell, weren’t there some suspicions early on that EQ had swiped some diku code? Didn’t amount to anything, but that’s how *similar* things were.

  7. Mike Rozak said on

    Time wrote:

    Enough of the “this is wrong”. Let’s hear some “this is right” or “what about doing it this way?”

    To take a famous quote from a movie:

    Col. Nathan R. Jessep: You want answers?

    Lt. Daniel Kaffee: I think I’m entitled.

    Col. Nathan R. Jessep: You want answers?!

    Lt. Daniel Kaffee: I want the truth!

    Col. Nathan R. Jessep: You can’t handle the truth!

    People, such as Raph, are posting new and innovative ideas all the time. For the most part, people don’t listen because the ideas are so far outside their understanding of a MMO (aka: WoW-clone) that the ideas don’t register. This same idea myopathy exists with much of the VC that provides the money.

  8. Wolfe said on

    The problem appears to be related to how developers and designers normally earn their living.

    Its a positive feedback cycle defined by investors and publishers which herd all productive talent in the same direction. Not very dissimilar from how domesticated plants increase their by humans desired properties by being domesticated.

    In the end only indies or hobby developers have the environment where change is not a lethal gene. But it will take dozens of generations for any of these changes developed in that environment to become desirable to the investors. Until then it might make sense to aim your ambitious alternative mmo design towards another genre and avoid comparison with the domesticated designs.

  9. Eolirin said on

    @Wolfe, well, that’s generally true, but I mean there are some maverick companies that totally buck the old ways of doing things. Like what Nintendo did with the Wii. It’s not *impossible* to pull off, though you may need to make some budget sacrfices. But you’re right that few people take risks in the game industry. Thing is, considering how well some of the people that do take big risks end up doing (like Nintendo), you’d think people’d try it more often.

  10. Wolfe said on

    Isnt that because the decision needs to be taken by the highest ranking project sponsor?

    And to boot most of those are so far elevated from the actual design process that in the rare case of them having a real innovative idea its impossible to avoid risk aversion through the chain of command and end up with the standard solution anyway.

  11. Gene Endrody said on

    I’m never bored by comparing MUDs to MMOs, but people who “implying that today’s MMOs owe their entire existence to the MUDs of yesteryear” are over simplifying. Rogue type games and D&D were the two greatest influences on Sherwood. I didn’t play MUDs until well after launch, mostly because I met Matt Mihaly. However, someone could say there’s Diku influence on Sherwood and they wouldn’t be entirely wrong. I was influenced by Diku’s influences. MUDs, early RPGs like Ultima, Rogue type games and D&D are all part of an established set of best practices or required reading and giving all the credit to only one of them is unfair. I think that’s what rubs some MMO developers the wrong way. Richard’s point of challenging old best practices, whatever their origin, is still a good one.

  12. PlayNoEvil said on

    The same people who act like graphical MMOs didn’t evolve from MUDs are pretty much the same folks who seem to think that there were no games before PC games.

    This argument would be humorous if it wasn’t for the poverty of much of modern computer game design.

    Even if graphical MMOs did not evolve from MUDs, it would be very worthwhile for MMO designers to look at what was tried, what worked, and what didn’t for these other game frameworks.

  13. Michael Chui said on

    I think the real issue is that Bartle is an opinionated person and comes off as such.

    This.

    I’m almost always on Bartle’s side, and when I’m not, it’s kinda fun because the stuff being argued about is interesting and he’s making me think. (When I’m on his side, I either cheerlead, fall asleep, or get annoyed by his style.)

    It’s not really in what he’s saying at all; it’s what it looks like and sounds like when he says it. He’s not good at spin. Especially, it seems, when taking interviews in person. And while that’s hardly unique to him, it’s something I feel he should think about and work at improving.

    There’s a comment, here, that I think might help: Request video interviews. You have precious, precious few videos of your face and body language. That might help.

  14. Ola Fosheim Grøstad said on

    Much heavier use of instancing — it was a very unusual and rare technology back then.

    Depends on how you see it. Was often used for mazes in MUDs, but wasn’t really needed. And a world without intrusive instancing does provide the better experience.

    Dancing.

    The first MUD I used had a disco called Zeitgeist with disco-lights and a bar. I also created animations for my avatar in 1993/1994. So no, MOOs didn’t introduce this.

    Pictures.

    The first MUD I used was graphical.

    That said there was a significant number of single-user games in the 1980s which could have been adapted to multi-player, so I won’t say that you wouldn’t have had MMOs without MUDs. I think D&D has more of an impact, overall.

  15. Raph said on

    “Dancing” was somewhat tongue in cheek. :)

    It definitely existed prior… but it’s such a visual thing, I don’t know of any muds which took it as far.

    Just like crafting existed prior. But the sort of crafting we had in UO, which is now sort of the default in all the MMOs, was taken from the LegendMUD crafting, which was inspired in part by the DartMUD crafting.

  16. Richard Bartle said on

    Michael Chui>I’m almost always on Bartle’s side

    Yes, me too!

    >He’s not good at spin.

    I don’t even try to spin. Spin is an attempt to trick people into thinking something that isn’t true. I just try to answer honestly, or, if I can’t, then I say why I can’t.

    >it’s something I feel he should think about and work at improving.

    I am who I am. Part of who I am involves a dislike for dishonesty, and I regard spin as dishonesty. Another part of who I am concerns a great distaste for boastfulness, which means I’m hopeless at self-publicity (not that you’d know it, given some of the recent comments in blogs). Sure, I could try to “improve”, but even supposing I succeeded, I’d necessarily change in other ways.

    >Request video interviews. You have precious, precious few videos of your
    >face and body language. That might help.

    It wouldn’t make a lot of difference when it was reproduced in text, though. The Massively interview was taped, but it wasn’t a podcast. If it had been a podcast, I doubt many people would have listened to it anyway.

    Richard

  17. Richard Bartle said on

    Raph>from Mark over at Mythic/EA

    Lest readers gain the wrong impression:

    Mark Jacobs is one of those handful of people who invented his own virtual world independently, which means he can legitimately claim his work isn’t strictly part of the MUD tree. I know very little about Aradath, but it wouldn’t surprise me if you could track some of what he was trying to say with it through Dragon’s Gate, DAoC and Imperator to WAR. Ironically, given the way the argument about similarity between MMOs unfolded, he’s one of the few designers who has every right to make WAR an evolutionary advance on earlier MMOs, because he’s basically continuing his long-standing oevre.

    Also, Gordon Walton cut his MMO teeth playing Avatar on PLATO, so he, too, comes at this from a different angle. Indeed, Bioware’s MMO is one of the two large-scale worlds currently in development that I’m really looking forward to seeing in action (the other one being what CCP is working on).

    The point about the invention of MUDs (or MMOs, for those who think they’re unrelated) being obvious is one I raise myself, as you say. Look at the golf thread in a talk I gave last year in Spain to see what I mean. We were always going to get these things. However, almost all the ones we did get can trace their ancestry back to MUD1 (for reasons I explain in the above talk), whether their designers like the fact or not. It’s just the way things happened.

    Today’s virtual worlds are the leaves of a tree, and to deny the relevance of the branches and the trunk is to miss out on an understanding not only of how we got where we are, but also of where we’re going.

    Richard

  18. Prokofy Neva said on

    No, actually I think it all comes from the Bible.

  19. Mike Rozak said on

    MMOs have removed more features from MUD gameplay than they have added

    and

    Look at the golf thread in a talk I gave last year in Spain to see what I mean.

    Harkening back to ye-olde-evolution discussion. These remind me of mass extinction:

    1) There is a stable ecology. (Pre-MUD or pre-EQ)

    2) Something comes along (a meteor) and kills off most of the animals, leaving a lot of empty uninhabited land. (Introduction of PCs, or introduction of 3D accelerators)

    3) The survivors multiply, lots of evolutionary experimentation happens. Such as giant centipedes or flying fish. (List of first 10 MUDs, or first 10 MMORPGs)

    4) Once the land is repopulated, overpopulation occurs. (DikuMUD clones, or soon-to-come MMORPG clones)

    5) Most experimental species die off. (DikuMUD wins out, XXX wins out)

    6) Back to a stable ecology awaiting the next meteor. (Or paradigm shift)

  20. Amaranthar said on

    Weren’t MUDs basically an attempt to put D+D into computer processing?
    And speaking of instances, P+P games were all instanced.

  21. Raph said on

    I should have had a paragraph break in there — I didn’t mean that Mark was a mud vet, but that he was one of the execs of the 90’s. in fact, he’s one of the survivors from the generation prior… not to many of those still active in the industry.

  22. Eolirin said on

    @Amaranthar, actually, iirc Bartle’s been on the record as saying about the only thing inspired by DnD was using levels. So I’m pretty sure MUDs don’t really have that much to do with DnD, at least in terms of how they evolved. It’s more coming from the high fantasy roots that dnd also grew off of. Tolkien is likely a bigger influence in this stuff than Gygax was.

  23. Gene Endrody said on

    “Weren’t MUDs basically an attempt to put D+D into computer processing?”

    That is the third time D&D has come up in this thread. If “today’s virtual worlds are the leaves of a tree”, as Richard says, it’s D&D that’s the trunk. It binds not only the many MUDs, but also Rogue, Net Hack, Adventure, Moria and many others. I agree with Richard: we need a sense of where we came from, but we are getting fixated on one of the branches. What was more significant or revolutionary? D&D or the MUD? Bartle or Gygax? It would be as easy for table top RPG gamers to claim that MUDs are just obvious evolutionary change from pen and paper and THEY deserve all the credit for today’s MMOs.

    “Today’s MMOs are mostly reskinned muds.”

    And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D.

  24. John DeLancey said on

    Apologies — I haven’t written in trackback functionality yet. No need to approve this comment. I just wanted to let you know!

    I linked to and partially quoted your work here over at WGFriends, as I found it somewhat related to a separate discussion. Hope it’s not a problem!

    - John

  25. Raph said on
    “Today’s MMOs are mostly reskinned muds.”

    And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D.

    I have argued at length before that muds actually did a poor job of capturing the spirit of D&D — much like Wizardry missed it too, getting the rollplay and not the roleplay.

    But nobody denies the immense impact that D&D has had. That said — muds were as diverse in style as the entire pen and paper roleplaying segment. There were “diceless” systems, there were GURPS-like ones, there were Star Frontiers-like quasi-wargaming ones. Yesterday’s muds were, I repeat again, more diverse than the MMOs we have now. More than just reskinned D&D.

    This goes back to the early days, even. The earliest muds often had “scavenger hunting” as a major element, for example — more inspired by Zork than by the levelling games.

  26. Raph said on

    John — no problem. & I checked out the site and saw a LegendMUD feature (!).

  27. Brede Armozel said on

    I have to say, Mister Koster, I do agree about functionality in regards to MUDs versus MMOs being less in MMOs at least from the end user point of view. I remember even in MUSHes being able to tinker with soft-code, character descriptions, description/text parsing, and room building. Granted, an MMOs today it would be abused with all the worse than LOLcats sort of crowd that stalk about in the MMO customer base, but it would just be neat just to have more customization within reason. Even UO and SWG have the fun room and building customization options, but yet every other MMO seems to avoid this altogether save for LOTRO. It’s just strange how MMOs lack that depth and yet MUDs are really beginning to expand on it through new kinds of combat systems and skill progression models (some are level based, others are percentage based). I know one MUD that’s technically roomless and zoneless as well, which is great but confusing since it’s still a text based interface.

    Anyways, spot-on in this entry. :)

  28. Eolirin said on

    Meh, I still don’t see D&D as being a good starting point for MUDs. As Raph said, if that’s what they were going for, they failed miserably. I actually would submit that they failed for a different reason than Raph posits though.

    D&D, especially the early D&D that would’ve been contemporary with early computer games, has a very narrowly defined intent in how it’s to be played. It’s entirely about small group situations and specifically about dungeon crawling. Anything else is built artificially around those game mechanics by the players, not by the system itself. D&D’s greatest impact came not from D&D itself, but from the fact that it inspired the players of it to examine things from a different direction. Even D&D mechanically didn’t do much to engender what we’d call roleplaying today… that was all the players adding things that didn’t exist in the rules and weren’t really even encouraged by the system. It provided a window into something else, but the players were almost completely responsible for building the door and going through it; going beyond it’s mechanical strictures to create something greater. Nothing really reskinned D&D, because D&D itself wasn’t the core of that experience. It was only the framework around which that experience was created. The real core was the gaming group, the GM and the interaction with the players.

    MUDs have very little to do with that intimate 3-8 person group that goes around rolling dice to stomp monsters. It’s got more to do with the visualization of worlds and the attempt to populate them with real people. As Raph brings up, the questing systems had more to do with text based adventures than D&D style leveling, and you see elements of that in many different areas. The concept of a persistent world that you can move around in and effect state changes in is more representative of those early text adventure games than it is of the typical D&D group. Wandering from room to room in a MUD is much more evocative of that than anything else. Even more damming to the comparison is the loss of the GM. While D&D would have you running a game for other people, custom designing and modifying the gameplay to their tastes, character abilities, and playstyles, MUDs basically replaced the GM with what amounts to the Z-Machine, making it more closely related to a large scale multiplayer version of Zork than anything else. It became static rather than dynamic, bound to the conceits of the mechanical systems and pre-existing development work.

    The group dynamics were different too, if only because of scale. Competition became partially institutionalized in a way that it rarely would be around a game table. Economy became a factor, something that never really comes up in D&D (and I’m not talking buying equipment with gold when I say economy). You ended up with worlds where people would come and go at will, never really being locked in to the same group of people for the same adventures, but all sharing the same space, something that was just plain impossible with D&D. You lost that intimacy of the gaming group, the extremely personal way that the game was played with a small close knit group of friends. And you instead got a whole community sharing the same world. You might not like all of your fellow players, you may not agree with all of them, and you might not even play the game with most of them… but they were still there, part of the same world you were playing in. It’s not even remotely comparable of an experience to sitting around the game table playing D&D, and it has nothing to do with a hyperbolic comparison of how much people pretended to be someone else in them. They’re just not the same beast, and they *can’t* be no matter what you try to do. Scale assures that.

    So I see early MUD development more as “Hey, let’s create a world and fill it with real human beings” and less as “Hey, you know, it’d be cool if we could do this D&D thing over a computer network”. I’d go as far as to say that D&D’s influence on gaming was similar to Tolkien’s influence on D&D itself; something that got people interested in the topic but that ultimately had little to do with creating a line of derivation that built on the specifics of what it did. Tolkien’s elves and wizards look nothing at all like the elves and wizards that he inspired once you go beyond the surface similarities that can at best be called stereotypes. CRPGs and MUDs look nothing at all like what D&D actually does beyond that most superficial layer as well. You have levels and classes and “roleplaying” but the experience and ultimately mechanics are not even remotely similar.

  29. Wolfe said on

    Should the concept of Genre be related to production technique or artistic message?

    According to the music industry the genre primarily dictates production technique. The artistic message is almost unrestricted but some messages are more dominant than others.

    Looking at mmorpg’s the genre dictates both, this would appear to be an industry wide accident.

  30. Richard Bartle said on

    Gene Endrody>If “today’s virtual worlds are the leaves of a tree”, as Richard says, it’s D&D that’s the trunk.

    Roy Trubshaw never played D&D. I’d played it quite extensively, but I took very little from it; the main thing was the level structure (and I did consider other possibilities; I went with D&D’s because it gave me what I wanted). D&D didn’t really have a great deal of impact on MUDs until DikuMUDs, which really took D&D structures (but not the gameplay) to heart. In terms of trees and branches, MUDs/MMOs and D&D are branches off the Tolkien tree, along with Fantasy literature and Fantasy movies/TV. Going further back, Tolkien’s work itself was a development of myth and religion.

    >What was more significant or revolutionary? D&D or the MUD?

    Significant to whom? The “worldliness” that separates MUDs/MMOs from other forms of computer entertainment isn’t a consequence of D&D at all, it actually owes more to a role-playing game I created and played for my own amusement when I was in my early teens (before I - or possibly anyone else outside of Gygax & Arneson’s gaming groups - had heard of what was to become D&D). Now the class system we see in today’s MMOs was indeed ripped out of D&D, and therefore you can legitimately claim that D&D is an ancestor of today’s MMOs; however, it’s not an ancestor of what makes MMOs MMOs. Likewise, the graphics in today’s MMOs can be traced back to Spacewar!, so Spacewar! is an ancestor of today’s MMOs; however, it’s not related to the “MMOness” of them - that which distinguishes how they inter-connect with one another, yet are separate from other forms of computer game/product. That central core of what an MMO “is” does, however, inherit from MUDs. What’s more, it stops there.

    >It would be as easy for table top RPG gamers to claim that MUDs
    >are just obvious evolutionary change from pen and paper

    and THEY deserve all the credit for today’s MMOs.

    “Today’s MMOs are mostly reskinned muds.”

    And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D.

  31. Richard Bartle said on

    Bah, I hit a tab and a return and posted my message before I’d finished typing it…

    >It would be as easy for table top RPG gamers to claim that MUDs
    >are just obvious evolutionary change from pen and paper

    Easy, but not how it happened. MUDs may well be an obvious evolutionary change from pencil & paper RPGs, but that wasn’t an evolutionary change that took place.

    >And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D.

    This is the sort of remark that looks as if it should be true, but isn’t. You can’t use such assumptions as a basis for an argument; you have to use observations that actually are true. You especially can’t argue this way when talking to someone with personal experience of the matter.

    Richard

  32. Derek Licciardi said on

    @Richard,

    Reskinned D&D might be a bit over the top but let’s face it, the core gameplay mechanics of most CRPGs, singleplayer or massively multiplayer, stem from P&P games. P&P games provide a “visual” context with which to observe things like skill systems, dice rolling mechanics, class balance, etc., etc. All of these influenced the current crop of MMO designers in some way or form. I’ve heard arguments all of the web about thing like, “The Shadowrun dice rolling mechanic would make a good underlying system for an MMO.” Ultimately, that gets a designer thinking and their experience with P&P games is an ingredient in the formula that becomes their MUD or now their MMO.

    So while I can understand your statement that “And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D” is not actually true, I don’t think it is quite as black and white as you’re making it out to be. Designers look to lots of sources for inspiration and P&P has traditionally been a treasure trove of nuggets to be leveraged in an MMO.

  33. Gene Endrody said on

    “You can’t use such assumptions as a basis for an argument; you have to use observations that actually are true.”

    I agree with both you and Raph. I’m not going to attempt to rewrite the timeline of events and I’ll acknowledge the MUDs massive impact. However many of the designers I’ve met consider D&D THE big influence. Every time I open a character screen in a game and see attributes like “Strength” or “HP” I’m reminded of D&D. So many designers have a copy of the Dungeon Master’s Guide sitting beside their “Designing Virtual Worlds” and “Theory of Fun” :)

    It just seemed to me like this post got dangerously close to sounding like: “We former MUD designers did it all by ourselves and hereby lay claim to all MMO history.” You created an environment and a way of thinking about things that spawned the MMO. However the pen and paper guys also created an environment and way of thinking about things that spawned the RPG and made a major impact on MUD.

    “D&D didn’t really have a great deal of impact on MUDs until DikuMUDs”

    But it did have a massive effect on todays MMOs, despite the fact that we’ve never been able to capture D&D’s true sprit in a computer. You could make a family tree for MMOs with MUD1 at the trunk and it would be right. But you could also make a family tree with D&D at the trunk. It would look a little different, but it would be just as right.

  34. Derek Licciardi said on

    @Eolirin

    Like I said to Richard you guys are right in that MUDs and MMOs are not reskinned D&D, but it’s not as black an white as the two of you are letting on. Small anecdote from my MUD days here:

    I was at the UMass Lowell for most of my CS undergrad work and we had a VAX VMS system there with some form of a social space on it. The game was a very basic MUD in that it had rooms, chat channels and the ability to move about the world. The game was called “Monster” even though it was devoid of so called monsters. For all intents and purposes this game existed without the influence of D&D even though many of the admins for the game played in a weekly D&D session including myself. When it came time to expand the world and evolve it to the next step, the admins used their D&D experience to plan how to evolve the game. We were able to get beyond the basics of setting up objects (what properties should they start out with), combat (what dice rolling system needed to be implemented, skill system design) and eventually NPCs. (what attributes do they have) All of this was prototyped in the first version by implementing what we knew from D&D and other P&P roleplaying games like GURPS, Shadowrun, Paranoia and Call of Cthulhu.

    Without those games and that knowledge, the process of creating the evolved game would have been significantly harder so it was and is very difficult to ignore the influence of P&P on our MUD. I kept this experience with me as I moved to admin other MUDs through the 90s. I would venture that this line of thinking and decision making in early MUDs was more prevalent then those that shunned all form of P&P influence to create a world with people in it. On the same token, I do not go so far as to say that MUDs tried to recreate the D&D experience online. The only game I know that tried to do that was Neverwinter Nights. If recreating D&D online is what MUDs we’re trying to do then they failed for all the reasons you mention. We built something new by picking apart the remains of a P&P experience and using elements from it that helped accelerate development while discarding the rest of the P&P experience as not needed. Still, we used our P&P experience to make it happen and knowing where you came from is just as important as having a vision of where you are going.

  35. Raph said on
    Looking at mmorpg’s the genre dictates both

    Looking at them as a genre is part of the problem. DikuMUD is a genre. Virtual worlds are a medium.

    It just seemed to me like this post got dangerously close to sounding like: “We former MUD designers did it all by ourselves and hereby lay claim to all MMO history.”

    The post is in response to claims of irrelevance, not an attempt to say that everything is from MUDs. Ultima DID have a huge influence on UO, for example, and there’s little doubt pen and paper was an influence all over the place.

    The game was called “Monster”

    Monster was actually one of those “simultaneous inventions” that we cited — it is not actually based on MUD in any way, and was an independent invention.

  36. Eolirin said on

    @Wolfe, I think dictates is the wrong word, because yeah, the lack of difference in terms of feel and intent is pretty much “accidental”, and it’s not at all manditory. It’s just a high risk investment, and it’s expensive, so no one innovates much, or even tries different things. But EVE and WoW have very different “feels” or if you want to call it artistic message, and going back closer to the beginning, UO and EQ did too. So it definitely doesn’t *have* to be like that.

  37. Eolirin said on

    @Derek, you may be missing my point then. That doesn’t actually go counter to what I was saying. If MUD and MMOGs are part of the same tree, then D&D is the rain that helped it grow and mature. As Bartle says, D&D’s influence on MUD1 was minimal, but… there’s a strong possibility that ADVENT was inspired by it, and thus DUNGEN, as well as Zork… and all sorts of other stuff that did play a bigger role in MUD1. But there’s definitely nothing much in the way of mechanical pillaging until much later on, which means the whole concept of what a MUD is had little to do with D&D at all, even if you can trace a line back showing inspirations and influences that stemmed from there if you take a circuitous enough route. This is again, very similar to the position of Tolkien in the foundation of modern fantasy work. Lots of inspiration, lots of influence, but very little in the way of direct descendence, at least in the way that you can trace most modern MMOGs back to MUD1. Anything stolen from D&D is more about flavor and alternate implementations of core MUD1 type concepts. The line comes from MUD1 and those few other independent developments; D&D is something that got people more interested in playing around with the stuff, not something that’s actually part of the same tree.

    It’s importance in doing that cannot be understated of course. It made people interested and curious and willing to try out these neat things and gave them a way to look at implementation of certain things, and that it did that is very important to the growth of the genre… but it can’t get creator’s credit here either. The stuff we see is inspired by it, not derived from it. And that’s the key difference I was trying to highlight.

  38. Gene Endrody said on

    “That central core of what an MMO “is” does, however, inherit from MUDs. What’s more, it stops there.”

    Ok, I’m not going to disagree because as pioneer, you get to define the terms. Hovever when I’ve thought about Sherwood’s family tree, D&D and Rogue were impossible to ignore. WAR, WOW and EQ also sit in the RPG family tree. Whether these games are a unique type of RPG or whether they are a unique type of virtual world is just a matter of perspective. From the perspective of an RPG, you’re left with a different central core that pays homage to a different family tree. I ask the gamers: Were you playing RPGs like Baulder’s Gate and Diablo before you got into MMOs? or was it the MUDs that got you into this?

  39. Eolirin said on

    … And it case it’s not clear why it’s important that that distinction be drawn… it’s because the mechanical systems that were pillaged from P&P games ultimately are just dressing for the core experience and focusing on them is more likely to cause hideous problems than not. It’s vitally important that the core bits that make virtual worlds (to use the catch all here) unique are clearly understood or the mechanical bits won’t serve their purpose properly. That’s what they’re *about* and focusing on the trappings to the exclusion of the core is a recipe for disaster.
    P&P games are very good for mining for mechanics that can be used to fill specific needs in a MMOG, but they’re very poor at teaching about that core experience, because that core experience isn’t even remotely the same. That’s why it’s wrong to say that MUDs and MMOGs have a line of derivation from D&D rather than “merely” being heavily influenced by it.

  40. Eolirin said on

    @Gene, that’s an irrelevant question though.

    Zork and then the Lucas Arts adventure games got me into computer gaming in general, so you could say that Day of the Tentacle and Sam and Max are responsible for me playing World of Warcraft, Half Life 2, StarCraft, and coutless other completely unrelated genres and games. As a player, something that interests me can have tangental ties into other (mostly) unrelated areas.

    But that does not mean that those other areas are all that important in terms of being able to *make* those things though. Useful maybe, important, not so much. BG and Diablo aren’t even remotely comparable to UO or WoW in terms of what needs to go into building them and building them well, though Diablo and WoW are closer to kindred spirits. But no matter how you look at it, the core systems are so completely different in terms of what they end up providing the player that the more specific lessons learned from one cannot be ported to the other and trying to make the games with the same mindset would be doomed to failure. You can grab a useful mechanic here and there, but you need to understand what you’re really trying to do and what you’re really offering and need to be offering or you’ll botch it up.

  41. Matt Mihaly said on

    I’m not sure I can get behind the idea that MUDs are reskinned versions of D&D. Some MUDs are, to be sure (particularly the DIKU family), but others bear very little relationship to D&D. For instance, some MUDs have very heavy socio-political elements in them that are core to the gameplay and have no precedent in D&D. Others focus on player-created content in a way that also has no precedent in D&D.

    I’d agree that to some extent (a very limited extent in some cases), the monster bashing portions of MUDs derives somewhat from D&D but it’s a pretty tenuous connection (in some cases, such as Avalon or the Iron Realms games, the connection pretty much starts and ends at the ideas of scalar health and mana. In the Iron Realms MUDs most of your abilities won’t even work on NPCs, in fact, as the games revolve around complicated PvP.)

    Of course, other MUDs don’t even have monster bashing (some of the MOO branch for instance). Shangri-La, for instance, a once-popular sexually themed MUD, didn’t have any killing at all that I recall.

  42. Gene Endrody said on

    “That’s an irrelevant question though”
    Point taken - you’re right.

    “But that does not mean that those other areas are all that important in terms of being able to *make* those things though.”

    You mean from a technical standpoint? I have coded a number of smaller MMOs - small in size, not traffic. It was RPG stuff I found the most challenging and I was speaking from personal experince. Yes there are traps, but RPG designers and coders cross over into MMOs just fine.

  43. Andy Havens said on

    And MUDs are reskinned Dbase III+ databases. Right.

    When we talk about something that is both art and technology, it’s difficult to separate the two. And I’m not sure it’s important or helpful. The goal here, it’s been said, is to either “innovate more” or at least avoid doing the same old things the same old way. I’m not sure those things are either; A) possible, or; B) to be directly sought after. Why?

    Well, you can use a tool without understanding its history. In some cases, in fact, if we’re looking for innovation, it’s good to *not* have a perfect idea of the past use of the tool. One can become too focused on comparisons with the past. For example, we have people here talking about which features, specifically, are in MMOs vs MUDs vs. DikuMUD vs… etc.

    A hammer and a saw both have a handle. Does that mean one is the forerunner of the other? Or that they share a common, grandtool? Maybe they do. Or maybe the guy that first put a handle on one tool then said, “Yowza. Let’s add this to the other sharp rocks.”

    My point is that when it comes to games (as opposed to more directly quantitative studies), lineage matters much less to me than comparison, regardless of what influenced who. Is there an element of fun in live, D&D games that can be replicated in MMOs? Yeah. Cool. That’s great, then. Is there something of the compulsive, numerological “this-always-goes-there” building from MUDs that is (for some) a neat part of MMOs and (for others) a quirk that dates back from the “database-y-ness” of earlier games? Sure.

    If a new “Web kid” comes along who has some interesting ideas for how to use Flash for these games… does he have to go back and play text MUDs to make sure he’s not recreating the wheel? No! Wheels work really, really well. And he may learn something from the recreation process.

    This form of art/leisure (like so many others) is so heavily influenced by so many forms that to require a distinct pedigree is, I think, something of a waste of time. The fact that you show examples of how similar, successful games were created independently of each other seems, to me, to be a proof of this. “Game ABC did XYZ and it was influenced by game DEF. Game GHI also did XYZ, but independent of DEF.” OK… So… what was the point again?

    Not that it isn’t fun watching the fur fly ;-)

  44. Derek Licciardi said on

    @Eolirin,

    I might have missed your point. I do agree that MUDs can’t be directly descending from D&D or any P&P RPG. That’s pretty easy to see so we’re in agreement that as long as you do not trivialize P&P’s impact on the development and evolution of MUDs you’re good. That’s what I thought Richard was doing in his comment. In the end it might all be semantics though as it seems that the web of influences is hard to put into a straight line of branches and leaf nodes. The whole thing is more like a weighted graph where the weights change when viewing the graph from a different angle, thus obscuring the ability to choose a single vertex as the center of the graph.

    About the only pattern we can make out if it all is that P&P generally came before MUDs which came before MMOs and there’s some sort of connection there that’s rather tough to define. Let us not forget that P&P != D&D. P&P covers many more forms of gaming than rolling dice and bashing monsters.

    http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/dicelessgames.html
    http://www.sjgames.com/toon/
    http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/rpg/series.php?qsSeries=19

    The multiplayer aspects of MUDs(Diku, Moo, MUSH, LP, …) and MMOs are important but so too is the world that provides context for the players to exist and that context is heavily derived from P&P. The rules that govern how hundreds of players play together in a MUD or millions in a MMO all seemingly have been influenced by the rules governing how a few friends would sit down together and play a P&P RPG. Direct descendancy is tough to prove but heavily influenced is just a weaker connection along the same lines of descendancy and with the case of P&P and MUDs it’s difficult to truly say if MUD is a direct descendant or merely heavily influenced by P&P. Depends upon which angle you’re looking at teh graph.

  45. Richard Bartle said on

    Derek Licciardi>the core gameplay mechanics of most CRPGs, singleplayer or massively multiplayer, stem from P&P games.

    There’s certainly a way you can look at a lot of MMOs and a lot of single-player RPGs and say yes, these share mechanics with D&D. If you look at another dimension, say graphics, then many of them share this with other computer games. If you look at yet another one, say tactics, then some have much in common with wargames. They aren’t all bound by any of these, though. What all virtual worlds - from WoW to EVE to Second Life - have in common is some kind of “virtual worldliness” factor that separates them out from everything else.

    Now if you’re talking about today’s big Fantasy MMOs then yes, there is a direct line to D&D through the DikuMUD gene. If you were talking about a single-player Fantasy game like Oblivion then I dare say there’s a link there, too (I’m just speculating, mind you). So if your particular interest were D&D derivatives, it would make sense to say Oblivion and WoW were both cut from the same cloth. However, even though Oblivion and WoW are similar in many ways, they are different in a way that WoW and Club Penguin aren’t.

    >I’ve heard arguments all of the web about thing like, “The Shadowrun dice rolling mechanic would make a good underlying system for an MMO.”

    So it might. Designers aren’t restricted to inventing original mechanics for everything they do. Mechanics aren’t what makes an MMO an MMO, though.

    >It just seemed to me like this post got dangerously close to
    >sounding like: “We former MUD designers did it all by ourselves
    >and hereby lay claim to all MMO history.”

    Well, without us MMOs would have had a different history, but yes, there were lots of influences from elsewhere. However, when you look at the MMOness of MMOs, there’s an audit trail from almost every one of them stretching back to MUD1. WoW to EQ to DikuMUD to AberMUD to MUD1. If you want to consider the Fantasy elements, then you’d have a different trail: WoW to EQ to DikuMUD to AD&D to D&D to Tolkien. If you want to look at the combat mechanics, it would be as above except continue from D&D to Chainmail. There are many different tracks you can follow depending on what interests you. If it’s the “real-time, automated, persistent, shared, imaginary places you can visit through the vehicle of a character” definition, though, you’re pretty well going to end up at MUD1.

    >However the pen and paper guys also created an environment and
    >way of thinking about things that spawned the RPG and made a
    >major impact on MUD.

    It wasn’t a major impact. Tolkien was a much bigger impact, if you want to credit someone else.

    Gene Endrody>when I’ve thought about Sherwood’s family tree, D&D and Rogue were impossible to ignore.

    So you were trying to create a rogue-like D&D, and the fact that you made Sherwood an MMO was only a secondary consideration?

    >I ask the gamers: Were you playing RPGs like Baulder’s Gate and
    >Diablo before you got into MMOs? or was it the MUDs that got you
    >into this?

    This is like movie-goers whether it was Titanic and Sleepless in Seattle that got them into watching emotional movies or The Battleship Potempkin. Few movie-goers will have heard of the latter, but most of the directors will have, and if you ask them about montage then they’ll tell you all about it. Sure, it may have been silent and in black & white, but it informed most of today’s movies through its innovations. Its not having been seen by most of today’s movie-goers doesn’t render it irrelevant. Likewise, the MUDs that came before UO and EQ and Kingdom of the Winds are not irrelevant merely because today’s players didn’t play them.

    Eolirin>The game was a very basic MUD in that it had rooms, chat channels and the ability to move about the world. The game was called “Monster” even though it was devoid of so called monsters.

    Yes, that was Rich Skrenta’s creation, I know about it (I cite it in my book as one of the occasions when virtual worlds were invented independently). It did actually feed into the MUD tree through the development of TinyMUD, although sadly for the D&D-influence case all the game elements of it were removed for this purpose.

    Matt Mihaly>in some cases, such as Avalon or the Iron Realms games, the connection pretty much starts and ends at the ideas of scalar health and mana

    D&D didn’t have mana, it had one-shot spells ripped out of Larry Niven’s Warlock series, so mana isn’t actually a D&D influence.

    Richard

  46. Gene Endrody said on

    “And yesterday’s MUDs are reskined D&D.”

    Uncle. I’ll retract the statement. (Does that ever happen!?) I winced when I posted it. I was playing devils advocate because Raph’s post did not ring true for me until P&P was acknowledged. MMO vs MUD felt so similar to the P&P vs MUD debates of the past that it had to be brought up. Combined with Derek and Richard’s comments, I think we’ve better captured the spirit of that time.

  47. Gene Endrody said on

    “So you were trying to create a rogue-like D&D, and the fact that you made Sherwood an MMO was only a secondary consideration?”

    Sounds a little silly the way you put it, but Sherwood was a simple fantasy themed avatar chat room where you could swing swords at each other and it didn’t do any damage - very silly play fighting. Laugh it up, but I was at over 300 simultaneous players average at that point. It was Rogue that then provided an alternative approach to content that gave players something to do besides chat. Made the hobby into a company and 300 into 5000+

    D&D provided the first abstraction of a hero character into tangible values you can work into a system. Every computer game that abstracts character values, like strength, HP and armor must recognize D&D in it’s family tree. It doesn’t mater if the system behaves like D&D - the moment you define a value to something like strength or intelligence, D&D is there. That was it’s major contribution.

  48. Eolirin said on

    @Gene, D&D kinda swiped that from wargames though no? :) What D&D brought wasn’t representation via stat - that’s a much older concept, I mean hell, Baseball has been using statistical abstractions to define it’s players for ages and it’s essentially the same concept - it was the concept that those stats could grow and change over time. It’s character advancement via leveling and not statistical abstraction that’s the real mechanical innovation of D&D’s systems. And yeah, leveling was a *huge* thing that’s influenced a lot of stuff, even MUD1. Important contribution to be sure, but not something vital to MUDs or MMOGs in terms of what makes them MUDs and MMOGs. I’m kinda arguing from the same position that Bartle is here, that the mechanical bits that are used to fill various needs in a virtual world are pretty much interchangable and replacable and don’t speak to the inherent core of what actually makes them virtual worlds. D&D has had an awful lot of use in providing specific mechanics to fill those various needs, but it’s the needs that define the genre, not the solution to those needs. And the needs are not at all the same even if the systems to fill them can be co-opted.

    MMOGs don’t need D&D to be MMOGs, though D&D has been very useful in helping to solve various design issues. This isn’t about minimizing the importance of D&D in terms of gaming as a whole, just about isolating out where it’s contributions actually *were*. And they’re not in the same places that Bartle is talking about.

  49. Eolirin said on

    @Derek,

    D&D was the only possible influence on MUD1, because none of those other games existed yet. And D&D’s direct influence was pretty much limited to the level system. MUD1’s influence was arguably much greater in terms of defining the commonality of what came after rather than the specific implementation of that commonality. D&D’s contributions were all primarily in implementation of various subsystems. Implementation isn’t as important in defining a game as intent though. The more abstract concept ends up defining feel much more.

    And I’d very strongly disagree that the rules governing the *interactions* of MMOG scale playerbases had anything at all to do with the rules governing the interactions of people around the gaming table… those interactions have very little to do with the character to character interactions. Persistent state worlds, guilds, community structures and player economies have vastly more to do with the large scale playerbase interactions than the combat and character advancement mechanics. Even on the smaller scale there are many vital differences, class balance suddenly became important, characters needed to be interchangable, content needed to be repeatable on some level, and more importantly, everything had to feed back into the above large scale interactions.

    If P&P allowed designers to easily drop in mechanics and content it did so by morphing it to fit the core of what defined the virtual world, not the other way round. So yeah, it’s been important in terms of what it’s done for these game worlds historically. But it’s not intrinsic to them, and you could replace them entirely, and they’d still be virtual game worlds and still need ways to do the same jobs. D&D and P&P have been useful abstractions to steal from in solving various design issues, and they’ve perhaps gotten more people interested in the genre in general, but they’re not much more than that.

  50. Gene Endrody said on

    “D&D kinda swiped that from wargames though no?”

    D&D abstracts character traits like charisma, intelligence and wisdom in a way that describes the attributes of a hero beyond impersonal units on a battlefield. Yes, there were attributes assigned to units in war games, but the purpose was purely for combat. D&D was the moment that gaming went from distant generals fighting strategically on a battlefield to epic heroes, seemingly out of the pages of a novel, fighting for honor and living lives of adventure.It went from war time strategy to character driven narrative. It went from impersonal to personal. The character sheet had the effect of creating a personal attachment to your hero and allowed us to imagine personality traits. The difference between the War Game and the Role Playing Game (the RTS and the RPG) is the perspective. The RPG is played from the perspective of the hero, not the general, and D&D was the first to do this. It defined the space and everything else followed. We take this all for granted now, but in 1974 this was a new idea.

  51. Gene Endrody said on

    (darn notebook…I wasn’t done)

    So the two key questions are: Is it played from the perspective of the hero? Does it abstract character attributes? If the answer is yes to both, then you have D&D in the family tree.

  52. Morgan Ramsay said on

    We take this all for granted now, but in 1974 this was a new idea.

    D&D’s use of character attributes as a storytelling device was not a first.

    People have been doing that for centuries.

  53. Mike Rozak said on

    Richard Bartle wrote:

    Now if you’re talking about today’s big Fantasy MMOs then yes, there is a direct line to D&D through the DikuMUD gene. If you were talking about a single-player Fantasy game like Oblivion then I dare say there’s a link there, too (I’m just speculating, mind you). So if your particular interest were D&D derivatives, it would make sense to say Oblivion and WoW were both cut from the same cloth. However, even though Oblivion and WoW are similar in many ways, they are different in a way that WoW and Club Penguin aren’t.

    CRPGs like Oblivion clearly harken back to Wizardy I and Ultima I. Before them were less-successful CRPGs (on the Apple ][ at least) of “Temple of Apshai” and another proto-Ultima one whose name I’ve forgotten. Wizardy I and Apshai were obvious D&D implementations.

    Another game to note was Eamon - kind of a single-player DikuMUD, although it came first. I wouldn’t be suprised if the DikuMUD authors played Eamon. From a functional (not matrilineal RNA heritage) POV, DikuMUD is very similar to Eamon, but its complexity is akin to Wizardry I. Multiplayer is a relatively small conceptual leap from there.

    My point: There has been a tremendous amount of cross-species DNA exchange. Lineage gets fuzzy. It’s an interesting discussion that goes nowhere… except that it points out to current WoW players that the same basic game goes back nearly three decades… and is getting a bit stale.

  54. Wolfe said on

    I’ll readily agree that mmorpg’s are a medium rather than a genre, but I dont see much of the rest of the world ready to accept this. Review sites, retailers, publishers and gamers alike appear to consider mmorpg’s as a genre.

    To do something about this we need to establish this long desired grammar which draws the line between medium and genre. And between artform and medium. Its already done for music and working relatively well there. However in music you dont use the word music for anything with any level of precision.

    In games we still need to develop the foundation which in music separates “in key” from “in tune” and “on time”. A Theory of Fun has gotten a lot of people down the road of using the same language. Which is awesomely useful. But you still see new games failing on the most primitive aspects of wrongs, its like your opera is played on violins which are out of tune. Even the most radically different and spectacular story will fail when this happens. In games it happens always if the development is stressed for time or budget. Hence the solution is to avoid innovation and copy functional pieces from history.

    Here I find that clumping a concept such as levels to be mandatory is a blatant flaw made by the designer. Its like saying all operas need exactly the same harmonic progression as The Wedding of Figaro or they will fail. This is just a viable trick to replace a competent composer with someone elses artistic expression.

    However the nature of the industry has driven almost all modern mmorpg projects towards designing by blueprint copying and minor adjustments for their local culture. What Dr. Bartle and a lot of other oldtimers appear to say is that this makes boring games for those who already grokked the patterns.

    But after all this gibberish I have to ask the real question:

    How do you get a well funded mmorpg project on the road which is free enough to develop something based on idea diffusion rather than blueprint copying?

  55. Ola Fosheim Grøstad said on

    @raph: Yeah, some things comes more of a result of the quantity of players than design (raids, dancing and crafting). If only 5% of the population enjoys a collaborative activity (dancing/crafting) most MUDs (perhaps peeking at 40 simultanous) would have problems sustaining it as part of the culture.

    I can’t think of a single significant feature in MMOs that I haven’t seen some version of before, but yes, scale matters and you get something different when you change the scale.

    I still think D&D has the most influence because I assume most who create MMOs have played it and thought “wouldn’t it be cool if we could create this fantasy world in a computer simulation”. Then they went on a build a MMO where you can build a character… I think most of the rest would follow from that pursuit. The essential features aren’t that advanced.

    When it comes to MUDs I think many who went on to create their own MUDs were inspired by single-user text adventure games in addition to D&D. That’s how they felt to me anyway. The MMOs don’t feel that way, at least not the ones I’ve seen or read about. The depth appears to be lacking.

    (The “quote this commen in your reply” link seems to provide the wrong text.)

  56. Gene Endrody said on

    “D&D’s use of character attributes as a storytelling device was not a first.”

    Ok, so you’re basically saying that Gygax didn’t invent the RPG? and the D&D wasn’t the first? I’m game. What’s your proof?

  57. Matt Mihaly said on

    [quote]
    How do you get a well funded mmorpg project on the road which is free enough to develop something based on idea diffusion rather than blueprint copying?[/quote]

    You have two choices:

    1. Become independently wealthy first and then self-fund it.

    2. Garner enough of a reputation/history of success that you can successfully demonstrate to investors that you’re able to execute (ideas are easy, execution is hard).

  58. m3mnoch said on

    dammit. i’m late to the party and bartle takes all my points.

    [quote post="1787"]In terms of trees and branches, MUDs/MMOs and D&D are branches off the Tolkien tree, along with Fantasy literature and Fantasy movies/TV.[/quote]

    [quote post="1787"]So if your particular interest were D&D derivatives, it would make sense to say Oblivion and WoW were both cut from the same cloth. However, even though Oblivion and WoW are similar in many ways, they are different in a way that WoW and Club Penguin aren’t.[/quote]

    tho, he’s substantially less sarcastic. you guys’ll just have to pretend there’s a lot of “comma dumbass!” in his posts, i guess.

    /sigh

    i got nothin’ now, richard. thanks.

    stupid metastream discussions. taking all my brainpower over the weekend.

    m3mnoch.

  59. Matt Mihaly said on

    Oh, I should add that you have to also find investors with an extremely high tolerance for risk since what you’re proposing adds extra risk onto an already extremely risky endeavor.

  60. Raph said on

    [quote comment="138760"](The “quote this comment in your reply” link seems to provide the wrong text.)[/quote]

    This reply is partially a test — but it seems to be working.

    Now, it did an interesting thing earlier — Richard’s comment was held for moderation for some reason, and in the admin panel, everyone who quoted him showed their quotes as “moderated.” Still earning the ins and outs of this new plugin…

    It does seem to autoquote the last comment made…

  61. Wolfe said on

    [quote comment="138766"]

    You have two choices:

    1. Become independently wealthy first and then self-fund it.

    2. Garner enough of a reputation/history of success that you can successfully demonstrate to investors that you’re able to execute (ideas are easy, execution is hard).[/quote]

    Both of these would appear tricky if you want to achieve innovation by Idea Diffusion, the first one because its mostly unlikely. The second one because it basically means you have to go down the path of Blueprint Copying.

    I guess for several reasons, but the primary one is that a success story is not associated with an individual but the whole team, company and business behind the result. For an investor to be able to rely upon a previous success you’ll have to prove that you will use the same successful process for developing the new title.

    This in turn becomes a positive feedback loop which makes it impossible to follow up on Bartles wishes of inducing change to the artistic expression within the medium.

    So what remains is the third choice of finding investors willing to take big risks. I guess you will need to present a development team with some significant industry experience even in that case. And preferably also have some guidiance from veterans without falling back too far on the standard sollutions just because its cheaper to implement these?

    More likely we’ll see changes to the industry come from some unexpected source.

  62. Eolirin said on

    [quote comment="138748"]“D&D kinda swiped that from wargames though no?”

    D&D abstracts character traits like charisma, intelligence and wisdom in a way that describes the attributes of a hero beyond impersonal units on a battlefield. Yes, there were attributes assigned to units in war games, but the purpose was purely for combat. D&D was the moment that gaming went from distant generals fighting strategically on a battlefield to epic heroes, seemingly out of the pages of a novel, fighting for honor and living lives of adventure.It went from war time strategy to character driven narrative. It went from impersonal to personal. The character sheet had the effect of creating a personal attachment to your hero and allowed us to imagine personality traits. The difference between the War Game and the Role Playing Game (the RTS and the RPG) is the perspective. The RPG is played from the perspective of the hero, not the general, and D&D was the first to do this. It defined the space and everything else followed. We take this all for granted now, but in 1974 this was a new idea.[/quote]

    For the benefit of those with short attention spans the following two paragraphs are simply supporting evidence for the following statements: D&D didn’t invent as much as it inspired. And it did it by wrapping up old concepts in new and more accessible ways.

    I’ve never really looked at Wisdom, Charisma, and Intelligence as anything other than power stats for spell casters and bards, at least in the early verisons of D&D. Early D&D never did much for me though, and I’m a product of a younger generation that had access to things designed to foster more story based games from the get go. I don’t have that veil of “damn this was really awesome and I’ve never seen it before, and I can do x, y and z, and it makes me think about all this stuff I haven’t thought about” so I don’t see much functional difference except that the scale was shrunk from squads of units to individuals. This isn’t because I take that for granted, but because I have the emotional distance to examine it solely for mechanics and not how it made me feel. And I’m not willing to call this a huge leap in terms of doing things. If anything it’s solely a cognative shift from wargaming, or a mechanical shift from “playing make believe”. D&D put them together in a way that a lot of people wouldn’t have thought about, and that was an important step, especially because it gained a huge amount of traction and thus got people thinking about this stuff… but it’d be silly to assume that the actual proces