New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Mythicscape is starting development on ScapeFX, a new MUD client directed towards the mass of text-based MUD games. It is a Java based client with an API for writing java based plugins to customize it for a particular game. The client is started on the MUD's website using Java Web Start technology making it a "click to play" experience.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Looks interesting.

Wishing you great success.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

There is now a demo available.



More information is coming soon. The main webpage will also be up shortly.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Very nice.

Game looks interesting as well.

Is there a way to increase the size of the font? I looked, but couldn't find one.

Doing a fine job with it.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

A more comprehensive version of the site is now availble:

Wiki and documentaion is being worked on as well as updates to the client API! (Such as font selection as mentioned above).

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Java downloader keeps saying "Download stalled." :(

edit: Okay, the full-blown client downloaded, but the demo one stalls with about 10 seconds to go. Retrying the basic demo starting link shows it still has 85% of the download cached, but never resumes to finish downloading the last part.

addendum feedback, based on fullblown demo to Sharune:
- client doesn't seem to reconnect (offline message changes to online, but no content is shown in the main window).
- suggest having some more autosizing options for the various windows, or at least some intuitive snap-to behaviour based on nearby points of interest (another window / application edge)
- Suggest "Remove tab" be called "Close tab"
- Status bar could be more configurable (e.g. time online?)
- Resizeable windows look good, indeed overall the client is a very responsive user interface, but perhaps support for *rescaling* a window could added (e.g. maps / groups) ?
- Suggest adding a 'keep on top' option to some of the windows (e.g. map on top of text window?)
- Might want to show a progress bar when downloading news items etc. takes more than a second or so; there's no feedback that the client is doing anything at present.

re. the website/forums/wiki:
- can't see any way to create a user on the wiki to make comments there (a la the discussion pages)... have you linked them to the forum accounts or something?
- forums look very empty... perhaps a basic post showing what triggers/scripting/etc. is possible in each of the areas.. ? (or did I have to register to see all the forum content?)

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Thanks for the feedback gth, we'll look into it :)

Also, we're changing the licensing so that muds that accept donations fall under the non-commercial type (the cheaper annual fee).

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

That's a ridiculous amount of money to pay to license a MUD client.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

From
Free MUDs (no donations): $350/first year, $700 p .a. thereafter
Commercial MUDs (including donation only): $1,500/first year, $3,000 p.a. thereafter

My biggest problem with the licensing is that a MUD could (in effect) be ransomed for the users that connect using this client. What happens when half your userbase uses such a client - that you've spent so much time configuring and tailoring the MUD output for - only to have the annual fee spike much higher?

I don't know any completely-free MUDs that could come up with this every year, especially given so many of them follow a licensing approach that doesn't include donations. A more reasonable model could be a once-off up-front fee with a much smaller annual fee - at least then you might have the option of a once-off donation drive that your playerbase would contribute to that's in their own interest. But you couldn't sustain that annually.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Well, honestly i do not see that the reduced license cost of 350 should be a problem to any semi-established free mud. You should be able to accept donations to pay for the license fee no matter what mud codebase you are using. They are donating for the client, not to run their game. (I'm sure this is up for debate though :P).

This sums up to a playerbase of 35 people paying 10 dollars each to play the mud using the client for 1 year. "Normal" fees to play a game is what? 10 dollars per month?

We're not really targetting our product to muds that cannot pay this low fee. Any mud admin that thinks 350 is so high they cannot pay it (even with donations from players that are going to use it) is not the customer base we are aiming our product at. Usually you are not a solo admin running your mud, but a bunch of people that together can finance this. Of course, I realize 90% of muds probably fall into this category, hell, 90% probably doesn't even have 35 players... but these are not our future customers (probably).

Our intention is not to put a custom client codebase into every startup mud out there. It is for the ones that actually have a backend of either lots of players or people with decent economy. Or those that wish to create a kickass commercial game with a nice looking graphical client. (As a side note we will probably in the near future realese a java based game engine codebase as well for licensing).

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

An established mud will (hopefully) run for more than a year though, and you're talking $700 per year after the first (assuming the pricing doesn't go up in the future).

But there's another problem: Players usually have a preferred mud client, and if you've already got an established playerbase, the chances are they won't want to change to a different client. So how do you convince your players to donate for a client they don't want to use?

It's mostly going to be the new players who will use this, and it's certainly a nice way to lower the entry barrier for them. But this also reinforces gth's point about the potential for ransom; if you've built up a new generation of players who love the ScapeFx client, and then one day you can no longer afford it, it could kill your playerbase (not to mention flushing years of customisation and plugin development down the toilet).

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

We'll see. Perhaps we have to lower it.

We might consider other licensing options as well if necessary.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Only registered users can modify the wiki. It will be people that have some idea of what they are writing about :P Otherwise to ask questions and similar we will use the support forum for that i think.

The "developer" sections of the forums will be available to licensed users belonging to the developer group. It will hold boards for how to customize the client. The plublic forums available to all will be the actual end user forums with discussions about things like triggers, scripting and so on.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

How is the project going in general?

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

It is going well. We should have a sample Eclipse project available on the wiki today where interested people can take a peek at how it looks when customizing the client with plugins.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I cannot see much of a point to anyone other than perhaps a commercial mud ever having need for something like this, and then, a commercial mud would likely have the skills in house to produce something similar. When you have access to free webclients clients like FMUD, or that you can customize MUSHclient and make it available as a download on your website, both of which cost nothing, there is really no excuse for every 1 man mud in existance not to have brilliant free tools for their players, both new and old.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

It is like comparing apples and oranges.

As said "1 man" free muds might not be the target of this client.

Personally i do not call your other options "brilliant". Nor being even near as customizeable as ScapeFX, which is the whole point of the client.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Whats not customizable about MUSHclient? have you scene what Aardwolf did with it? About the only thing missing from MUSH is a skinable interface, but the code is open and i guess any half competent coder would understand how to change the look and feel of it or design a new widget set for it. As for anything else, there is pretty much nothing you cannot do with mini windows and a bit of scripting with the added value of a large active community of users and developers.


So one could either spend their time developing plugins for MUSHclient, or spend $700 a year and still have to spend the same amount of time developing plugins for Scrape. Personally i would rather spend the $700 a year on advertising and beer and not necessarily in that order.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Yes. So you are saying aardwolf (top listing on this site) is a bunch of worse than "half competent" coders that cannot change the look and feel or design new widgets for mushclient? That is the sum of your post. Which i think is a ridiculous argument. (Since aardwold really aren't using any nice skin or good looking widgets for the mushclient UI: ). They did a nice work with it though i must say.

The idea behind a customizable client like scapefx is that you get AWAY from the looks of mushclient, fmud, zmud or any other "black window with text" client and can expand your UI to include new features.

You will soon enough get some exapmles of ScapeFX in action that shows things that will be very hard to do with mushclient!

And have fun with the beer!

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

We changed the licensing cost (due to lots of interested people asking for a cheaper license in email). Instead of offering a signup bonus we lowered the actual cost for both the free and the commercial license.

Reduced (free mud) annual license: 249 euro
Commercial annual license: 1499 euro

A sample project should also be available for download at the wiki very soon that shows how to customize the client and build your own instance of ScapeFX.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I think you are joining dots that were not there to begin with. My argument is that the only thing i can see that MUSH does not have that scape does is a skinable interface and that MUSH can do everything else that scape does and more, with a much bigger user base and has the bonus of being open sourced and free, and supports mxp pubelo and sound protocols.

So to take YOUR logic to the nTH degree, it could also be argued that Aardwolf (Your Target Customer) considers skinable interfaces to be not worth the effort and that MUSH is a superior product to EVERY other client out there, im sure 300+ online players average speaks for itself. Or perhaps they consider FMUD to be a better option for a web client as they use it as well. Hmmmm

I should also mention that for US $300 per year you could licence Portal GT for all your users as well.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Well, your argument is kind of pointless and we're talking your own stray of logic here, its your moot arguments that has come up in the first place. We made ScapeFX available just a couple days ago. Of course Aardwolf or any other game aren't using ScapeFX yet. (Hopefully some will eventually :P)

If you wish to promo Mushclient as a superior product to EVERY other client out there feel free to do so in your own promo thread? I'm not gonna express my own feelings about that client or FMUD here myself. Lets just say our players at Sharune fancy our Firebolt client over any of those.

Have a nice day!

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

But lets not argue here which client is the best. It is like asking which mud is the best.. There are no good answers to it.

I'll just point out that ScapeFX is a client which mudadmins get access to a fairly powerful API that can be used to create professional looking "click to play" entries into their games. All for a fairly cheap cost compared to what it would have cost to produce one themselves from scratch. With ScapeFX free muds get the option to create clients that looks and behaves like some of the commercial games that have spent thousands of dollars to develop... It is an opportunity for mudadmins to compete with the commercial games by having a pro looking customized client for a low cost.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Why stop now when you have been doing an admirable job at arguing how great your product is and how its worth ever cent being charged for it without ever providing a shred of support.

So does scrape support any of the following features or is it just scraping the bottom the barrel when it comes to mud client features,

Character Mode
Go Ahead
MCCP
NAWS
VT100
xterm 256
MCCP
MXP
MSP

Can you script in a language of choice? Or do you force a scripting language upon users?


Do you have some type of Service Level Agreement for the fixing of bugs within your software, if so, what happens when you fail to correct a bug within a specified time frame?

How do you plan on dealing with additional functionality? Will this incur additional cost if so what is the pricing structure for additional functionality, and time frames for delivery?

Will there be a formal contract so that customers know exactly what they will and will not receive, or will they just have to take your word for it and trust you, if you do plan on having a formal contract, how will you deal with variances in international contract law?

What types of remediation does a customer have if you fail to deliver on any of your obligations, will things like this be made clear before anyone signs on the dotted line?

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Please bear in mind this is the "promotion" section of the forums. It is designed for people to promote their mud or mud related activities.

While your points may very well be spot on, it is not terribly nice to hop into someone else's promotion thread and slam their mud/product.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Whatever. Is he supposed to take the time to create another thread dedicated to criticism for the product? This may be an advertising thread but this is also the internet where we don't have to be polite. What better place to debunk or show your criticism of something than in the place that they are promoting it? If I am reading the promotions and greatness of a product I will value that somebody is properly responding with valid criticism so that I can have more than just one (the creators) viewpoint on the thing.

Not that I would ever pay for the client. I've happily used zmud for many years.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

We've left out those protocols intentionally (MXP, MSP etc) to not clutter the client with unwanted features that will eat up resources. HOWEVER, it is very easy to add your own network parser plugin for features like this and if some customers request a protocol for these things we will create sample plugins for it that can be downloaded for free.

Myself, I've never understood the idea behind those protocols when you have a CUSTOM client you can do your own protocol for. Nonetheless, easy additions to ScapeFX.

If you are a ScapeFX customer, support is free. Upgrades are free.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

You as a player do not pay for the client. If you happily used zmud and make that an argument you do not seem to have grasped the idea behind this client.

The mudadmin pays the license, install it on the website and the players use it for FREE. 1, 10 or 10.000 players.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Mudadmins build their plugins to modify the client with Java.

Players write their scripts with BeanShell.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

So what you are saying is that we would have to trust that you will deliver the product and not take the money and run.

You claim that this client is intended for commercial and larger free muds that have the revenue to pay for this, yet you fail to offer even the most basic levels of protection that any right minded company would ask for. I would have a very hard time putting my money and faith in your product when one bug you do not fix in a timely manner could ruin my business and or drive away all of my players. To which they would have no recourse.

Maybe you need to go away and have a rethink about all this and come back with a real business plan and to have a proper understanding of the market and the needs and requirements of those whom you perceive to be your customers, because at the moment your all over the place and cannot even provide answers to basic questions that any commercial entity would be asking of you, your company and your product.

So i pose these questions again,

Do you have some type of Service Level Agreement for the fixing of bugs within your software, if so, what happens when you fail to correct a bug within a specified time frame?

How do you plan on dealing with additional functionality? Will this incur additional cost if so what is the pricing structure for additional functionality, and time frames for delivery?

Will there be a formal contract so that customers know exactly what they will and will not receive, or will they just have to take your word for it and trust you, if you do plan on having a formal contract, how will you deal with variances in international contract law?

What types of remediation does a customer have if you fail to deliver on any of your obligations, will things like this be made clear before anyone signs on the dotted line?

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

You seem to have a real grudge for this client do you? Mind telling us what game/company you represent?

No that is not what you are paying for. If you want that support, feel free to contact us for an SLA and we'll give you one for a standard market fee. You are paying to use the product API, not an SLA. Do you get an SLA when you use the Java API for example? Or do you get that with FMud or Mushclient (since that is what you are proposing people to use instead)?

Upgrades are free. We don't give any time frames.

No there will not be a formal contract for an SLA, unless you explicitly order one.

None. And it should already be made clear. Nothing out of the ordinary.
"... the Licensed Software and Related Materials are provided to you "as is" and Mythicscape disclaims all warranties and representations ..."

Happy now Tommi? Or do you want to know something else before you order the product? :P

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I'm taking the liberty to quoting you "tommi" from another thread. You changed your mind about mushclient?

Also, you realize that we are the developer behind Bat Client? Bat Mud hired us, Mythicscape to produce it for them. There is nothing that prevent mudadmins from customizing ScapeFX into something similar. (Although it would take A LOT of work since Bat Client is very advanced compared to the raw ScapeFX API). But the possibilities are there.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Actually, yes, it does.

Many muds and clients already support existing protocols - which means at worst a mud owner has plenty of examples to follow, and at best their mud already has them built in. Inventing your own protocol can be a lot of work, and it's unlikely other mud clients would add support for it, meaning you'd most likely end up either adding support for two protocols that did the same thing, or alienating the players who preferred their existing mud clients.

Take a look at MCCP for example. Back in 2001, Lasher gave some statistics for the amount of bandwidth it saved Aardwolf, which showed that with a little under 250 MCCP users the bandwidth usage dropped to around 18-19% of its original amount. He went on to say "if we ever have to move to a host that charges for bandwidth it could very well mean the difference between being able to afford to stay online or not". You've said you're targeting large muds, so I think this is definitely the sort of thing that's worth looking at.

Now perhaps Lasher could have created his own compression protocol, but his goal was to encourage as many people as possible to use it, and that means it's in his best interests to have a widely supported protocol. Not everyone will use the same client, so using a standardised protocol supported by multiple clients makes a lot of sense.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

You seem to miss the point often and read to much into what is actually being said, but while we are into digging up history, why don't you tell the good people who read this just what you would charge for a client like batclient? I seem to recall it being something in the vicinity of US $12000, at least that was the number quoted for a very similar product.

So the reality is for $350 per year you get a pretty basic telnet app which you have to put in all the effort to write plugins for to give it any real functionality, and if you want something that is actually unique then you will be up for around US $12000 to get it.

Those were the figured quoted to me a little over 12 months ago.

Have a nice day :)

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Which point did i miss?

ScapeFX is more than just a basic telnet app. If you take a look at the feature listing you should see that.

Ohh okay, so you have contacted us regarding a client in the past? We don't publish financial information about our customers on a public forum which i'm sure people will understand. I'm sure the quote you got for your client were reasonable or even cheap compared to development costs in the REAL world. But i guess you figured you would instead try find your own programmer? And give them "Some financial reward". Perhaps you like to tell us the vicinity of that sum?

How did it go by the way?

Anyways, we've cut those costs a lot for people interested in a custom client since they can license the core ScapeFX engine for a very cheap fee now. Of course if you are looking to get a product like batclient or equivalent and you want to hire us for all the programming you are looking at a (although cheap compared to others) real development cost that is a lot higher than $350. Keep in mind that a real software company charges AT LEAST $100/hour for consultant jobs (more or less). That is three weeks of work for the quote you said you got from us.

With ScapeFX you have the opportunity to do a lot of the work behind the custom features yourself, from a codebase that is already functional. So any mudadmin with access to programming skills should be able to go a long way on their own without having to pay for hiring additional programming from whoever they seem fit.

I'm happy to answer any more questions you have. And if you aren't just trolling this promotional board perhaps you could take your flames to another forum. Feel free to send them to us in mail. There is a contact form on our website.

Btw, for interested people there is soon a sample Eclipse project available on the wiki. It will be possible to use this to build your own client and add your custom features to test with. You will be able to do this during a trial before you actually purchase the annual license.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

On TMC you compared the price of ScapeFX against the cost of developing your own custom client, saying that "you get a complete custom codebase for a client", and that "You have the chance to get a custom client ready for your game for $350". From that, I got the impression that the client was already complete, and that the licencee could customise it relatively quickly and easily.

However your recent post seems to suggest that the licencee would still be required to do significant further development in order to customise/personalise the client to any worthwhile degree. If that is the case, then Tommi's point (despite the aggressive phrasing) is actually a valid one - what do you offer over MUSHclient?

ScapeFX would be a little easier for the player to install (one click instead of three or four), and is relatively platform independant (MUSHclient requires a separate download for different operating systems), but that alone wouldn't convince me to shell out $363/year.

Is your client easier to customise perhaps? Do you have better documentation? Maybe you provide a larger library of prewritten plugins? Do you support multiple scripting languages? Better handling of separate windows? More flexible graphics support?

I know what the competition can do, but what is it that you offer above and beyond them? What could your client do for my mud that would make me think "that's the client I need"?

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Well of course you cannot get a CUSTOM client right off the bat without having to do some modification yourself... It would be kind of hard to accomplish that from our side :P But the raw ScapeFX client works in the default state when you install it on your site. Simply creating a skin plugin should get you a fairly nice client without much effort.

249 euro for a free mud. Not sure what your price tag is but i guess you done the calculation to that currency right :) And you are right, platform independent and "Click to Play".

I cannot tell wether it is easier to customize or not, but I certainly believe so. Mushclient is not my line of field and I never said it was so i shall not comment on its features.

The wiki should contain all info necessary to judge that yourself soon though. We're working on it.
will be a good start for anyone interested in customizing ScapeFX.

And we will provide prewritten plugins when we get requests for it. (Such as different mud specifc protocols that might be of interest and so on...)

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

So you do not know what features MUSHclient provides, yet, your claim is the ScrapeFX has superior functionality and offers better customization abilities. From my own observations it would seem that the only thing that your client offers that MUSHclient does not, its 1 click install and play which i do not think represents US350 a year worth of functionality.

In fact it sounds like all your offering is a very basic telnet application which just so happens to be customizable. This does not make a custom client, only potentially one, and then only if the end user has the skills and abilities to code in beanscript and or java. There is no library of pre-built plugins that require minimal modification to get working, everyone will have to reinvent the wheel and make their own chat, health bars and other typical plugins, there is no MXP, MCCP, MSP or peublo, all of which are mud standard protocols.

MUSHclient comes out of the box with a number standard plugins for health bars and the like, you can script in a language of your choice, including but not limited to Lua, VB, Perl and Python. So im yet to be convinced that Scrape offers US$350 value per year of investment.

Oh and you can be assured that i have no interest in this thread other than to bring the facts to the surface for all to see, i am not a representative from a competing company, i am not developing a competing product, no matter what you might like to imply from my previous posts. So rather than worry about what i have said in the past, maybe you should stay focused and concentrate on the issues i am raising now.

In business there are some standards you should always follow before you announce anything,

1. know your products strengths and weaknesses,
2. know your competitors products strengths and weaknesses,
3. know what the market wants and needs,
4. know who your customers are and the best way to reach them.

Some food for though, NO.

In reality you have potentially 25 - 30 customers at a stretch 50, of those 1/2 will not require something like this and 1/2 the remainder will not have the funds to pay for it, so that leaves about 10 games to which you could market this directly do. With everything you need to have a plan, without one your going to come across looking really amateurish.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Do your own research if you are interested:



<--- Your "basic telnet app" features i guess?

Try our custom firebolt ScapeFX implementation (click to play):


And compare it to Aardwolf's "customized" mushclient (just to take an example, it seems like a nice bundle up of mushclient):


Take a minute, sit right back and figure out which client will attract more NEW players or even get people to understand how to connect to the game. You yourself did a research about this tommi: "and none of them could work out how to use mushclient even when it was installed already for them". ()

The number one point of a custom good looking client is that new players have an easy entry into the game. People that may never before have tried out muds. I'm not gonna sit here and tell you "inbreed" mushclient (or whatever client) users to immediately shut them down and start with a new custom client. It doesn't work. We knew that several years ago. Get yourself a "click to play", good looking custom client and start attracting NEW players into muds!

Otherwise, keep up with the good work putting fire in the thread so it is at the top everyday tommi, thank you very much!

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Btw, a feature I haven't mentioned in ScapeFX is the log "recording" and "playback" tool.

Instead of just logging the text you can choose to log it as a timeline and replay it realtime with the playback tool. You will then watch the log as it took place. It will update your client UI accordingly so you see things like health meters, group displays etc getting updated as well.

So you can record a nice log and put it on your website for others to download and watch. Make your own "in-mud" storytelling, theatre, standup comedy or whatever :P

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

It does not make good business sense to call all of your potential customers who read this thread INBREEDS, it shows a clear lack of interpersonal and dispute resolution skills. While i might have been asking tough questions of you, your customers are going to be much asking a hell of a lot more when bugs show up and they want them rectified yesterday. Calling them a bunch of INBREEDS, and being all smug is certainly not the way to get repeat customers. When your potential customer base is already very small and your selling a boutique product, being professional is everything.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I said people that are "inbreed on mushclient" is not going to be using another client whatsoever. They are already settled in. The same goes for any client. These are not our customers primarily. Nor did i call ALL of our "potential customers inbreed". There is a difference. You took the word out of its full sentence.

I'm not gonna respond to any of your post from now on tommi as you have no intention whatsoever to discuss something without turning the whole issue around as a flame against our product.

Since you have no interest in our client, I'm gonna respectively aks you to quit posting in this thread. Thank you very much.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

No, what you said was,

Which says you consider all MUSHclient users to be inbreeds. Maybe you would like to retract the derogatory statement?

Interesting you should bring that up, sure my own research showed that 12 year olds do not understand enough about the telnet protocol to be able to use MUSHclient to connect to a mud, this is primarily due to them not ever having exposure to the protocol. What they did understand however were the mechanics associated with MMO's download client, install client, click icon to start client and then be in chargen. When presented with client mechanics they understand, even 12 year olds can connect to a mud, progress through chargen and play the game.

At the time i did not know that MUSHclient could be redistributed and configured in such a manner as i was not a user of that client, i had been a Portal GT user for many years and was going to license that client for my game as i liked the simplicity of and used extensively within my code the MIP protocol. which dealt with routing of data to separate windows, the displaying of status bars and gauges, the displaying of images and the playing of sounds. These things should be bog standard features of any client that is offering a rich client experience.

So far you have not shown that you're offering US $350 per year worth of additional functionality over the products you're competing against.

There are not a lot of mud owners who do any actual outreach and promotion in ways to grow new players that are not current mudders, there is IRE and a few others, but other than that, the vast majority of them work by word of mouth or promotion within the existing mud community. Existing mudders are rather precious when it comes to the client they use and are reluctant to change, so the real worth of Scrape is with targetting non mudders. This leaves you in a real predicament, because you have a potentially great product that has no real market. Unless you can convince mud owners to try and tap into the vast amount of casual gamers, like the 500,000 players of Farmville on Facebook for example, converting 1% of those would amount to a huge influx of mudders.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

You can now sign up for a free 20-day trial to test the ScapeFX API and build your own client before you make a purchase. With the trial you will receive the SampleSFX project from which you can build a client that you can deploy for your own game.

ScapeFX 20-day trial signup:

SampleSFX project info at wiki:

ScapeFX licensing info:

ScapeFX screenshots:

Click to play the Firebolt ScapeFX implementation:

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Tommi, why are you so intent on trolling this thread into oblivion? You made your points a long time ago. Now it just seems like you're trying to flame the OP for no apparent reason, and you're making yoursef look really silly and chidlish in the process. Perhaps you could take your discussion with Hephos to PMs or e-mails.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

Seconded. Asking tough questions about the client itself is fair enough but now it's getting personal.

I don't believe Hephos' intent was to refer to regular Mushclient users as "inbreeds". Please keep in mind there is a language barrier here too and give him the benefit of the doubt.

Anyway, personally a big fan of Mushclient but also very interested to see how ScapeFX turns out and learning more about what it does (and doesn't) offer compared to traditional MUD clients.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I have spoken in emails and pm's with Hephos and he is very respectful and excited about his client. NWA has been seeking a better Java client than what we currently have and I really enjoyed looking at his system.

Before you scoff at someone trying to earn some money for their hard work and system, perhaps try it out and give it a chance. No one is forcing you to use it or pay for it. I appreciate innovative people trying to make our MUD community better.

I feel sad that everytime it seems someone wants a little compensation for hard, quality work, everyone is so up in arms about it. As if our community should pay you to be part of it.

Good Job Hephos. I for one applaud your hard work.:)

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I am in complete agreement with this.

Looking forward to further updates, Hephos.

Re: New mud client in the works: ScapeFx
 

I agree with Lasher, Newworlds, and Mabus. I spoke with Hephos over email maybe 18 months ago looking for a price quote for a custom client, and my experience with him was very positive! Difference in geography, and therefore language, is something we need to keep in mind on the internet.

It looks good so far Hephos and I wish you success with your client. I do wish there was more support of commonly accepted MUD protocols built in. I also hope you will finish the sample plugins section soon! I think this could go a long way to helping hobbiest mud admins so they can focus more on the game and less on the client.

But I am excited so far, and I know I will be looking into it more when the time comes.