Improvements in the Next Version of MUD

A scree composed for Simon Dally on January 17th, 1985

The following are the major advantages which the new MUD has over the old. I shall distinguish between the present version, which runs on CompuNet, and the rewritten MUD by calling them the "Mark 1" and the "Mark 2" respectively. In reality, the Mark 2 would inherit the name MUD from the Mark 1.

Cheaper Hardware.

The primary advantage which the Mark 2 has over the Mark 1 is that it does not require a large, industrial-power, time-sharing mainframe computer to run on. Because of this, it is an order of magnitude cheaper to purchase or rent the hardware necessary for the system to function. As it is based on a modular architecture, the initial configuration, set up when the Mark 2 is first opened to the public, may have as small or as large a number of machines as desired. There's no need to obtain a powerful mainframe computer capable of handling up to 70 users if, for the first two months, there is only likely to be a maximum of around 30. Similarly, if 100 people are regularly trying to play and there are only 70 slots for them, it is simple to upgrade the Mark 2 hardware merely by buying in more microcomputers, whereas for the Mark 1 system the immensely prohibitive cost of purchasing a higher-powered mainframe would have to be borne. Buying in another mainframe the same size would allow two MUDs to be run, but not one MUD with all the players in it.

Lower Development Costs.

The fact that a fully-fledged time-sharing computer is not required, and that the majority of those microcomputers which are required are not needed until a week or so before the system goes "live", means that money need not be tied up while the program is being developed. If the Mark 2 works on a configuration of three machines, it will work on one of fifty or more, so the excess need not be purchased until they are immediately to be put to use. Buying them all at once will make them up to 35% cheaper than if they were purchased individually, but "all at once" in practice means over a period of several months; hence, the micro's will be just as inexpensive as if they were all available from day one of the project, whereas in reality the capital for them need not be used until later on in the development.

Reduced Running Costs.

Another major advantage of the Mark 2 hardware is that it is much cheaper to maintain. It does not need permanent operator supervision, and no special environment. Furthermore, it is far less expensive to insure the equipment, and it needs no external maintenance. Even minicomputers, such as VAXes, need regular, monthly check-ups by engineering staff provided by the suppliers.

Adventure Designing Language.

The Mark 2 is to be written in a new programming language designed to make it easy to write Adventures, particularly multi-user ones such as MUD. Since this language is unique to us, it represents a significant advantage over anything which competing companies may use. This is potentially the greatest asset of the Mark 2, because it heralds all manner of other significant advances over existing and planned-for programs, some of which follow.

Easy to Write New Databases.

The time required to write a MUD once the first one has been developed is far shorter than with the Mark 1, because the majority of the work needed to be performed has already been done. The language is much simpler, so that it is easier to describe the new worlds. No programming skill at all is required, which means that bona-fide authors may be tempted to use the system to define their own universes for our benefit.

Transportability.

Because much of the work in the Mark is done in the adventure-definition language, any computer system which has an interpreter for the language will be able to run all the MUDs written in that language. Hence, to move the Mark 2 onto a different range of machines, all that is needed is to write the interpreter for the target system. It will then be able to run ALL the software written in the language, ie. all the previously-defined MUDs, automatically. The language has been designed to keep the interpreter down to as small a size as possible, and much of it will be in a readily-transportable language already (C or PASCAL); only a few machine-dependent routines will have to be rewritten.

Hooks for Other Modules.

The interpreter for the Mark 2's definition language is modular, in that it may readily be expanded when new technology becomes available. In particular, if a graphics capability is required, it should be relatively easy to add the relevant graphics packages to the system. Laser discs for fibre-optic carrier media, digitised networks for voice-and0data, and high-speed connections between different MUDs, are all more futuristic possibilities which may be slotted into the present system when the technology becomes more commonplace.

Single-User Versions.

Since the Mark 2 will run on any machine which has an interpreter, and the interpreter is not too large to run on micro's (as was the case for the mark 1), it is possible to write Mark 2 interpreters for the home micro' market. These will be able to run the larger MUDs, as single-user dungeons (SUDs), but in practice they will probably have smaller sections of the main game, because they will not have the storage required for the entire database. Some if the packages required in the multi-user versions will not be required for the SUDs, for example the communication software, whereas other modules, such as graphics handlers, will probably be substituted in their stead. Interpreters for each home micro' need only be written once, and they will then run any of the SUDs written for the other personal computers, assuming they are not too large.

Efficient Implementation.

Another place where the Mark 2 scores heavily over the Mark 1 is the efficiency of its implementation. By this I mean that the program will use structures and algorithms better suited to handle the needs of MUDs. The Mark 1 was purely for research purposes, and the lessons learned in implementing it will make it that much easier to do the Mark 2. Any competitive products, of course, would not have the benefit of a prototype in this matter, and it is doubtful as to whether they would be able to do things comparable to the Mark 1's capability, never mind the Mark 2's!

Speed.

Although the Mark 1 does not run slowly, that is partly because it is run at nights on a fairly powerful mainframe. The Mark 2 implementation takes full advantage of existing hardware and software packages to build a parallel-processing network. Much of the work which would slow down the game is mundane symbol-crunching which isn't multi-user at all. The multi-user part can be hiked off onto a separate machine. This will speed up the response time no end. Also, because the system is linked to the user via a modem, these can be replaced were faster external lines to become available (or if the game were linked to an existing network, such as PRESTEL). Even at full throttle, the user will notice hardly any delay in obtaining a response from the game, because additional players do not add significantly to the load on the "shared" database management machine (the only possible source of a bottleneck).

Larger Databases.

With the proposed architecture, far larger databases may be written. The present MUD runs out of space at about 400 rooms, given 70K to utilise. The new system will have some 15 times that amount of memory. With hard discs used already (to store the text messages, and for accounting records), any extra locations may be stored directly on disc. in theory, there is no limit to the number of locations in a game, although in practice few players would want to start a MUD if they knew they were unlikely ever to hope to finish. Also, beyond a certain size it is necessary to introduce different start locations to avoid congestion. Hence, the size of the database is more likely to be determined by the "physical" layout of the world in the database, rather than any technological considerations.

Extensibility.

It is no great trouble to add on things to the game incrementally. So if a small database was used initially, later additions could be made at leisure. Also, because of the nature of the adventure definition language of the Mark 2, the addition of new rooms does not increase the number of actions exponentially, a big problem in the Mark 1. In there, and any other systems people are liable to build from first principles, adding a new room and its associated objects involves increasingly more work, due to the interactions with already existing objects. In the Mark 2, this problem is avoided by a hierarchy of object types, which means already-written code can be used to handle most interactions.

More Sophisticated Representation.

The Mark 2 has much more sophisticated representational techniques upon which it can draw, culled from the science of Artificial intelligence. These provide it with a greater descriptive power, and hence more complex entities can be made available than ever before in adventure games. This is the chief academic interest in the system, because of its great flexibility. It is unlikely that any rival company could come up with this kind of thing without a great deal of either experience of luck.

Greater Detail.

If more complex entities can be represented in the game, it follows that far greater detail can be given. Due to the amount of common store available, the descriptions will be richer and more comprehensive - they may even be written by a professional author for greater eloquence! The amount of detail an vary, for example in one game a "ship" might be a single object which can be manipulated as a whole; in another, it might be made up of more objects, for example a hull, mast, and sails - you may even be able to get into different rooms contained within it. The level of detail depends on the application, and is always at the discretion of the team designing the database.

Accessibility.

It will be far easier to access the Mark 2, because people will be able to dial direct using their own 'phone. Whether special data lines will be needed to make it run at 1200 baud I don't know, but the extra communicational costs borne by PSS users who play the Mark 1 will not be necessary for the Mark 2. in the long term, with access points all over the country, a large percentage of the population will be able to play at local 'phone rates, if not in Britain then certainly in America.

Better Hours.

A fairly obvious advantage which the Mark 2 will have is that it will be open to people other than nocturnals! The Mark 1, even the CompuNet version, is not available until late at night. The Mark 2 will be available at much more convenient hours, and will therefore have a wider user base than the present systems.

Intelligent Mobiles.

The Mark 2 will have the ability to represent non-player characters (mobiles" in MUDspeke) with far more apparent intelligence than found in present games. Indeed, there is no reason why they could not be made sufficiently convincing that people may have difficulty in deciding whether they're real or not. This will not be aimed for initially, because it is a highly complex part of the system which has very little return for effort involved, although simple mobiles which readily collapse upon mildly determined questioning are more feasible. Even these are such a revolutionary concept, though, that the mobiles provided at the launch will only be a pale shadow of what they could be with more work.

Natural Language Interface.

Present adventure games have a very poor natural language front-end. They don't understand many perfectly reasonable English-like sentences. One of the powerful features of the Mark 2 will be a complex Natural Language parser, capable of understanding virtually anything the players would like to say. Since the system is modular, this part of the program can be taken out and replaced by one for a different language, eg. French, if need be. I have already written parsers capable of delimiting sentences such as "after four seconds, using the small knife which is not silver stab three times the old wizard beneath the oak tree, then pick up some of his shiny coins but not any copper ones".

Reliability

The Mark 1 is not a very reliable program, but then it was never meant to be. It crashes quite often for obscure reasons, but the most popular one is hardware failure, which for a centralised system means that no-one can play. In the Mark 2, the software will be more of a "product" than a "program", and will be built with reliability in mind. Resistance to crashes due to the players, such as modem failure, will be built-in - it may very well come automatically with the modems! If any of the networked machines crash, then only one user is affected, and their call is lost. The line can then be removed so that no-one else is given it until the machine is repaired (or a backup substituted). The only major problems are when a "shared" machine, ie. the main database-handling one of the file server, fails. Then the whole system will be put out until it can be fixed. This can be made easier by using either a standard hardware, such that one of the other micro's can be used instead, or by always having a back-up machine to b used.

Security.

Unlike most computer games, there is no chance that the Mark will be pirated by unscrupulous persons. Since it will only be running on our system, no external agent will be able to take the software for their own use, unless we permit them. This is an advance on the case for normal adventure games, but for any competitive MUD-like game the same would be true. Similarly, no-one would wish to give one of their personae to another player, because if that persona were killed then it would be they who suffered. Again, this is better than the case for most games, for example the Mark 1 version of MUD, but isn't too difficult to incorporate into any rival system when starting off.

Commerciality.

A surprising feature which gives an edge to the Mark 2 is its commerciality! There is a much greater control over the behaviour of the players, because with individual accounts they can be individually disciplined for any indiscretions. This will make for a better game, with renegade elements easily controllable. Franchising the Mark 2 to different organisations will increase the amount of time spent playing it, and hence the experience obtained from the game can be added to, perhaps leading to an even better version in the future. The Mark 2 will also be more interesting for players as they will have external reports, for example magazines, which will heighten the play in the game itself. Everyone likes to see their name in print!

Advertising.

Because the game is commercial, this means money can be raised by advertising. If we have a regular user base of several thousand people, all interested in computers, then there is a good reason to be able to sell advertising space in it. This in turn may lead to "sponsored" MUDs, and will enable us to draw on expertise from other outside organisations.

Professional Wizzes.

An important feature of the Mark 2 is that we will be in a position to employ people to play the game and keep it under control. This would mean a person taking on the role which SUE played until her recent departure. With some high-level stabilising influence, the Mark 2 will be more fun to play than the Mark 1, since people won't get so ratty when they're the victim of some wiz's whim; it'll be more "just", in a sense. Also, the intrusion of unwelcome outsiders, perhaps players owing their allegiance to a competitor and attempting to disrupt the game or advertise a rival product, will be reduced if there is a permanent watchdog to ensure that the game is not spoiled.

Larger User Base.

The greatest difference between the Mark 2 and Mark 1 versions of MUD is that it will have a far greater user base. What makes MUD fun is other people, and the more people we have the greater the fun will be. A large user base is the Mark 2's most important asset. Things must start moving now before someone else robs us of it.