Misplaced Pages

Talk:Online creation: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:23, 12 October 2006 edit68.246.61.201 (talk) rv I'm sorry, the only person you censor is anyone anonymous. The person you make personal attacks on is Locke/Herb.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:25, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,025,724 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] 
(186 intermediate revisions by 45 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}} {{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|
*]: February 2004 – September 2005
{{WikiProject Video games|class=Redirect}}
*]: October 2005 – February 8 2006
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 50K
|counter = 5
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Online creation/Archive %(counter)d
}}


== Tim's edits on Feb 9 '06 == == The Isles 15 ==


The Isles 15 came out before 1.1. Though ILAB/OLC was written based on the 1.1 version, OLC had already made its rounds as "TheIsles15" and "TheIsles16" one year earlier. ] (]) 15:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Somehow TinyMUD went from "reminiscent of" to "inspired by" BASH. As pointed out earlier by Jlambert, it's not even the first one, let alone the second. I'm removing that since it's incorrect. Regarding the NiMUD section, it currently has emphasis on times when less relevant things happened and excludes those of more relevant things. For example, it currently says that it was the first publicly available one (without specifying that this is only among Diku derivatives; guess I'll change that right now too while I'm at it), and started in 1993. It excludes the time when it actually became publicly available. The way I word it seems to offend Locke since he keeps deleting it. I think that if it's significant that it was the first one available (among dikus), then it would make sense to also say when it actually was. Him and his friend writing it in 1993 is of no significance to the general public since the general public could not actually put it to any use until he decided to give it out. NiMUD's OLC was definitely not publicly available in 1993 unless he got a really quick response to his usenet post at 1pm on Dec 31, 1993 where he said he'd give it out to somebody if they gave him free hosting. The earliest evidence of him giving it out to the ''public'' was in his other post on July 29, 1994 when he was wanting help to fix its bugs . So, there was quite some time between the start of the project and when people could use it (even the buggy one). So, I would suggest someone else reword it to either mention when it became available (which seems to be July 29, 1994), or else just take emphasis off of the wrong parts. If nobody wants to do that, I'll deal with it later I guess myself. --] 19:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
:Prove it, the only decent source I know of says Jul 29, 1994. There's some evidence of a limited release in early 1994. --] (]) 16:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


First of all, prove that it wasn't ]. We're here to prove that it WAS WRITTEN, not RELEASED by the end of 1993, not 1994 as this erroneous article states. Furthermore, OLC was written initially for Merc 2.0, not 2.2 -- we kept updating OLC as they released new versions of Merc throughout 1993. 2.0b was the one I started with I believe. This occurred earlier in the year. As soon as 2.2 was released in October, we were already porting our 2.0b version to 2.2. We did all of our development on MS-DOS using the DJ Delorie GNU C Compiler for MS-DOS.
:The above is me, this computer's being weird and logged me out I guess. --] 19:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
::You forgot to mention that the Dec 31st posting was quite clear on indicating that the code would only be given to one or two people, and was conditional on them not giving a copy to anyone else. This certainly does not count as a ''public'' release. Also of interest is the mention (in the same thread) that EmpireMUD contained online building code, and had been leaked to an ftp site. --] 20:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)


Also, I finished cleaning some personal attacks on this page a little better, I only kinda half-deleted them earlier. --] 19:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::: Monster was developed on VMS. TinyMUD was developed on BSD Unix and very heavily inspired by Monster. BSD Unix used the A-SHell or ASH not the Bourne Shell. Regardless the Bourne shell commentary would be incorrect since neither link, unlink, chown have anything whatsoever to do with what shell you are running. They happen to be Unix commands, not shell builtins. I would be hard pressed to make the case that Monster Link/Unlink are inspired by VMS commands, since LINK is the command to invoke the linkage editor (ld on Unix) and there is no Unlink. TinyMud's chown is clearly inspired by the Unix command. I really don't understand the significance of pointing out the obvious origins of a single TinyMUD command. As to the origination of the rest of the commands, it would be sheer speculation. ] 20:39, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

== ] talk page ==
I went through the history and put unsigned tags for some of the more recent unsigned stuff, so this should be at least a tiny bit more readable. I noticed that a lot of things were censored or changed to imply something other than what was intended. If you change someone else's quotes without even a ... in there, then you might be changing the meaning of the statement, so always re-read the original and new version before making changes, or else just avoid changing it. For example, in one edit 141.158.97.121 made it look like I was saying that SMAUG's "online building" was nothing revolutionary, while really I was saying that neither it nor Locke's "online creation" are anything revolutionary. Also most of Eggster's messages refer to Locke in third person, so some edits in particular and especially hard to read through (I didn't change any of those though; just commenting that it's hard to read when people do that). Also, I didn't notice how much stuff that I personally wrote that sounded offensive or whatever. I noticed that ''"I skimmed the help files when I first got wizzed on NiMUD, but haven't been interested enough to create stuff on there (then didn't log in for a long time, so probably got inactive-purged by now)."'' which I added was deleted presumably because it's offensive for me to say that his MUD didn't interest me :P Many of the changed quotes have notes saying that they were changed, so I left some changed even though it was someone else changing it. Some other stuff I noticed got deleted for relevance, and I think most of them were legitly irrelevant, however, I did restore a couple. --] 02:45, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
:I'm also creating an archive page and moving some stuff to it which I think has been resolved and not discussed in at least a few months (as far as I can tell, half the stuff isn't signed correctly... so I'm guessing at ages of some of these comments rather than going through the history again. I tried to keep anything that's been added to more recently than September). As the note on top of it says, please do not touch the archive page; create a second archive page some time in the future when there's a lot of resolved things built up again. --] 03:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

== NiMUD updates ==

Removed repetitive information, rambling incoherent partial sentences, and wholly uneccessary and irrelevant personal information from NiMUD entry. Added repetitions of open source in last paragraph. Advise still breathing author and sockpuppets operated by said author to make up their collective minds whether the software is open source or something else. Deleted reference to Dmud, a toy mud recently released by the vain glorious non-deceased author of NiMud. ] 15:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Removed rather interesting but irrelevant personal information from VME entry. The topic is Online Creation. Would Locke or his sockpuppets care to expand on the general features of DIL scripts that are relevant to article. ] 15:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I would like an explanation from the reverter of my changes to the NiMUD entry. {{unsigned|Jlambert}}

Removing personal information makes no sense: a person creates software. To remove personal anecdates is to anesthetize history. {{unsigned|68.162.148.34}}

:I also reverted the changes to the opening paragraph. The term "online creation" was NOT coined by either Locke or Surreality. The term was in use well before their time IRT muds. See and . Second, the monster documentation does NOT contain the term "build" or "building" anywhere, it uses the term "create" and "creating" throughout to describe the activity. My personal speculation as to why the term was first changed to building and then to customization was so the claim for the term "online creation" can be made. Again this is not a vanity page Locke. Nor is it a place to create a revised history sympathetic to anyone's ego, dead or alive. {{unsigned|Jlambert}}

:According to ] information has to come from a reliable source. Personal anecdotes don't necessarily meet that standard. Besides, that bit about the coinage of the term really should be cited to somewhere, especially since it's a contentious point. ] 16:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

:Once again removed the same changes! There is no need to duplicate information in the NiMUD entry into the opening paragraph. Especially if it isn't correct - see above citations. Chris Woodward has is no more importance to online creation/building than Rich Skrenta or Jim Apsnes. How come you haven't written an entry on the first DikuMUD to have online creation yet, '''Temple'''? Or EPIC? Do I have to do it Locke? :-) ] 16:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Updated MUSH entry by pulling the most relevant sentence IRT online builing over to this page. Removed the repetitious NIMUD reference. The MUSH entry includes NO NEW information besides the debatable value of the login screen image(?). It looks to me like the entire entry was pulled off the MUSH page merely as a pretext to provide yet another reference to NIMUD. Now instead of making repeated references to NiMUD or that DuneMUSH inspired Locke and Surreality to create their OLC, perhaps you ought to write up in the NiMUD entry just what exactly DID YOU learn from DuneMUSH IRT online building. That would be a personal anecdote that adds to the topic of online creation. ] 17:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Removed Locke's edits that say Oasis OLC was derived from EnvyOLC and thus the Isles. Documentation in Oasis OLC states otherwise. Please cite your references for this claim Locke. ] 19:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

: Author of CircleMud iedit/redit is identified and acknowledged as by author of Oasis OLC in second release. ] 19:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

You know you can claim something that is entirely untrue and back it up as though it were, without proper citations. OasisOLC is symbolically similar to Isles/OLC which came out before Oasis was ever written. It is obvious that OasisOLC is based on the same type of interface that Isles OLC was. Not to mention the fact that pre-dating the Isles, OLC was a non-existant term. Before NiMUD OLC, there was only ''online building'' ] 23:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

: You're not going to get anywhere with that claim on online creation. Look at Jlambert's references above. Heck, here's another one that states 'There are lots of DikuMUDs that have online creation code' It was and is a commonly used, non specific term. ] 00:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

: Much of Armageddon's code was influenced through a collaboration between Morgenes of Aldara and I. OLC was first distributed to those folks as early as 1992. Thoric and Atari2600tim may be arguing that "online creation" was available as late as "1994" but the reality is that the code in Armageddon and in Aldara were both influenced by me, Locke. ] 13:54, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

:: I rolled back all of your changes Locke. You have provided zero evidence for backdating your software to 1992. In fact you have by your own words contradicted all such claims with the references you provided at the bottom of the page. Ehheh and my references above from 1991 and 1992 predate your creation of any mud software. ] 14:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

:: How about this usage of the term from '91? Can you dig up some kind of dated posting of yourself using this term earlier than that so it can be used as a reference? ] 15:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

::: The references he provided in the references section stipulate May 93 as his first UseNet post. He's already stipulated that Hidden Worlds is his inspiration for online creation, which makes this link of interest "Hidden Worlds, at 192.156.196.1 4000, is using essentially unmodified vego code at the moment" The earliest date I can find Hidden Worlds on a mud listing is 1993. His own words, "I played NamelessMUD, Hidden Worlds, and, yes, one other. That is the TOTAL listing of all the muds I have *EVER* played." ] 15:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

:::: Whatever with that quote: the first mud I played on was Nameless, but I had played MUSHes before that (and Zork). The first text-based adventure game source I ever worked on I copied from a book called "Write Your Own Adventure Games" which I had my father's fiance copy from a book in 1986. It was written in BASIC. Then I went on to DivWeb, a long defunct MUCK co-authored by Shawn Knight which was hosted at CMU and was primarily for Wiccans and Occultists. After that, I got involved with Chris Tchou (now at Bungie) who co-authored my first graphical adventure FutureStrike . For my high school Computer Science course, I wrote a Zork-like game called "Search for the Mystic Z" for my final project. -Locke ] 16:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

<pre>From: Santiago Zorzopulos
Date: Fri, Jun 19 1992 4:02 am
Groups: rec.games.mud.misc
Not true... There are lots of DikuMUDs that have online creation code (including
my own, Armageddon), that is almost as extensive as any MUSH or MUSE. Other
Diku imps have written similar code, and online creation is available on
many DikuMUDs now. </pre>

A year before you started your first mud Locke per your own references. Your claims cannot be verified. Please cease inserting such information into the encyclopedia. ] 16:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

::If you don't believe the author's anecdotes and evidence, why don't you track down Max Karpiak and ask him to tell the story. He was a great friend of both Chris and I, from Infinity BBS. Morgenes of Aldara (and Armageddon) knows that my code influenced his work.
] 16:16, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

:::It's not a matter of believing the anecdotes or not. Misplaced Pages policies require that information be cited and/or referenced so that it can be verified. ] 16:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

== Article Length ==

Removed the direct quotes of the docs, citing Wiki's article length policy . Kept references where they were supplied via the web; users can visit the repositories themselves to download and examine each MU*'s features. ] 16:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that Ehheh and jlambert have similar writing styles, and Atari2600tim has "gone by the way" (probably a "reserve" sock-puppet). I have filed for Mediation. ] 17:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

SPEAK OF THE DEVIL, IN SWOOPS SOCK PUPPET #3: ATARI2600TIM! ] 17:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

: If you are concerned about sockpuppet activity, you're welcome to file a ] request. ] 17:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

::If he doesn't do a CheckUser request then I'm going to myself later. --] 19:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

: jlambert aka Jon Lambert aka Tyche, a co-moderator of Tiny server repository on MudMagic. One can verify by PM . No sockpuppets. Nothing to hide. ] 19:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

In response to the article length I would point out that it was about 23k and well under recommendations. Even if it were its not an imperative thing to be done without giving the contributors a go at editing it. From what I've read Misplaced Pages policy does not recommend just deleting information when its sourced and relevant to the article. When I added the information on the other OLCs I invited discussion over the length (see talk above). Regardless I have edited the monster entry to provide a more informative summary. If the consensus is other entries in the article need shortening I can and will do similar summaries with an eye to shortening the section without total lossage. ] 21:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)



== armegeddon olc ==

Added new information on Armageddon's OLC and sourced it. ] 22:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


Armageddon's OLC is no longer public. ] 00:24, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

: I saw your three prior non-starter arguments. If you have a problem with me citing Armegeddon OLC as the first publicly available OLC for Dikumuds then you need to provide an earlier citation. ] 05:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

== Differences between online building and online creation (for ehheh) ==

This was already disputed; talk to Atari2600tim about that. We decided Online Creation, Online building refer to the same "live customization" features of these games. {{unsigned|68.162.148.34}}

:Ok, great. But if it's the same thing, why do you keep changing it away from online creation in the Monster section? ] 04:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

== Corrections - cites requested ==

* Opening paragraph
-Referred to by the acronym "OLC" or "OC", this was a significant improvement for ] variants, because they typically require a restart in order to implement any changes.

+Referred to by the acronym "OLC" or "OC", this was a significant improvement for ] variants, because older MUD-like games require a restart to implement any changes to the map or objects database.

The original sentence referred only to Diku and was changed from "they" (Diku) to "older MUD-like games" (??) with the added "(require a restart to implement any changes) to the map or objects database". Ambiguity was introduced. Retained "they" because those who don't do OLC aren't the subject of this page.

* Monster section
You have repeatedly changed the text, online creation to online building, online customization, and live customization. Changed back as your claim to "coining" the term has been proven false by multiple citations of prior use.

* Armageddon OLC section
-The first publicly available '''on-line creation''' software for ]...

+A privately distributed ''online building'' add-on for ]...

Sorry multiple citations listed call it "on-line creation" (see above comment IRT Monster). That it was publicly distributed on at least two ftp cites is confirmed by two of the citations. Retained "add-on" in favor of "software". You need to update the NiMUD Section to correct the erroneous statement that it was the first publicly available OLC for DikuMuds.

* NiMUD section
-... Woodward in 1993....

+... Woodward in 1992, though the first public disclosure on Usenet was in 1993. Development was delayed due to the 1992 release of Wolf3d...

Impossible dates. It's being disputed on this talk page and you've provided no evidence for any 1992 dates. You confirmed the earliest May 93 date yourself repeatedly. Changed back.

-NiMUD OLC was publicly released in various stages of development from ] to ] by Locke.

+NiMUD OLC was publicly released in various stages of development from ] to ] by Locke. Locke alleges earlier versions have been tampered with by MUD Distro site owners.

Date changed back to 1994. Public distribution announcement has been cited as July 1994. See Armageddon section for how to provide verifiable information.
* Oasis OLC
... which was an adaptation of similar features present in ''NiMUD OLC''.<nowiki>{{citeneeded}}</nowiki>

Note you are be requested to give a citation for the your speculation.

* Also can you explain how MUME "originates with Shadows of Isuldur" when MUME was around in 1991, years before SOI.

] 05:09, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

* No current version of NiMUD was released in 2006. ] 23:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

== bad usenet references ==

Removed references to usenet posts Locke claimed as his. Both references were to posts made from @cnsvax.uwec.edu by a garyke aka Ender/Locke from Sloth. Not the same Locke posting from @telerama.pgh.pa.us and @andrew.cmu.edu. ] 09:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Not true; Locke's first posts were done from a site in the UK. I don't believe that Ender/Locke was from Sloth any more than any other person could have been that person. I think its the first evidence of the OLC project. Locke attests it was his first mud site. Prove otherwise. Locke admits that he was using other people's accounts as this was his first contact with the internet. He was given access by soliciting sites from the others who had them as he did not have access of his own other than a local freenet dialup that allowed telnet. ] 07:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

:''"Prove otherwise."'' You don't have enough credibility for it to make sense for anyone to bother proving things to you. You still don't even stand behind your own words enough to refer to yourself in first person. ] (] • ]) 08:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

:Sorry but that poster, who variously identifies themself as , played the ] , Renegade Outpost and others. They were posting from the which is not in the United Kingdom, exhibit the annoying ] syndrome, and would hardly seem to have any motivation for posting later in August from a site in Pittsburgh, , which you've kindly clarified here earlier to not mean that you didn't also play MUSHes and Zork (and of course Wolfenstein3d which you've attached some importance to). Since I'm pretty certain you really meant this and not this ] I've updated that accordingly.

== dating of nimud ==

Concerning the dating disputes. I extracted the following from ftp://ftp.ccs.neu.edu/pub/mud/docs/mudlists/
<pre> <pre>
18 October 1993 Volume 6 Issue 6 Timeline, April 5, 1993 - December 31, 1993
CthulhuMUD zen.btc.uwe.ac.uk 164.11.2.18 4000 up 18
...
17 December 1993 Volume 6 Issue 10
CthulhuMUD zen.btc.uwe.ac.uk 164.11.2.18 4000 R* 23
* = last successful connection was more than 7 days ago
...
22 January 1994 Volume 6 Issue 11
CthulhuMUD zen.btc.uwe.ac.uk 164.11.2.18 4000 R** 21
** = last successful connection was more than 30 days ago
</pre>


Merc 2.0 released in 1993 : Merc 2.0 Beta released for anon ftp - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups
This correlates with the Usenet messages cited , , , , , , .


Already on MSDOS: Merc for dos - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups April, 1993
I suggest this is pretty damn good evidence that Locke started work CthulhuMud in August 93, it was up by October, and it went down in December 93. So the earliest dating of OLC code cannot have been prior to August 93.


Already distributed by April 21: Merc 2.0 Beta - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Mid-1993
Also...
<pre>
27 August 1993 Volume 5 Issue 10
Hidden Worlds cns.cscns.com 192.156.196.1 4000 up
</pre>


This is the post that shows Hidden Worlds added their OLC, mid-1993. It was never distributed and only worked on that mud. It was written by Kalgen, who also wrote another un-distributed OLC. This was the first one I ever saw on a Merc
On or about Aug 2nd, 1993 (broken thread) is first message mentioning hidden worlds in which Russ Taylor replies:
and it was the inspiration for ours though I never immorted -- Chris Woodward did -- our OLC was released only
<pre>
a few months later: Merc2 Area Editor - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups
>Hidden Worlds, at 192.156.196.1 4000, is using essentially unmodified vego
>code at the moment. All characters were nuked, unfortunately.
</pre>


Me announcing CthulhuMUD using my friend Chris Tchou's Andrew account:
Hidden Worlds appears on no earlier mud listing. If Surreality was a builder on Hidden Worlds and as the Isles documentation (see ) insists that is where they took their ideas from, then that's also supporting evidence of August 93 as the earliest possible dating for their OLC.
Cthulhu MUD - rec.games.mud.diku | Sept 1, 1993 --
this is precisely the time when we wrote OLC for our MUDs. It was only a few weeks/a month later that it was hacked and
stolen, so we then released it publically. I re-released it several times in 1993 and 1994. This is the basis for the
claim of October 15th. A week or month either way from October 15th is when it was written, period. I believe
CthulhuMUD was hacked on Halloween, 1993.


Cthulhu MUD the saga continues - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Looking for a site <- Sept 1993
It seems like a prima facie issue here IRT verifiability when three different sources all confirm it. What's the Misplaced Pages policy for handling a user who stubbornly refuses to follow verifiability and insists on repeatedly inserting wrong information and reverting in pages? I'd like to think he'd stop but he does not yet appear to be responding to any of the discussion points directly.


Where's Hidden Worlds..?? - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Hidden Worlds goes down
As a matter of record since I've found and included references to other OLCs, the user's page on their ] software has had its dates back-dated to 1991. It's also fair to point out the user has been continually messing with new entries by including references to his NIMUD or changing the term '''online creation''' to something else because he's apparently claimed '''coinage''' of the term, but see these searches from 1992 and earlier... and ). Both actions, it seems to me to be compelling evidence of pushing an agenda.


Hidden Worlds is back up! - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Hidden Worlds back up!
Now I'm a newbie to Misplaced Pages BTW. But I have read and understood the following... "Providing sources for edits is mandated by ] and ], which are policy. What this means is that any material that is challenged and has no source may be removed by any editor."


CircleMUD 2.11 now available at ftp.cs.jhu.eduub/CircleMUD - rec.games.mud.diku |
I've also posted the above on the ] page.
Sept 19, 1993, Circle 2.11 released


Cthulhumud - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups User looking for CthulhuMUD October 7th, 1993
] 21:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


C T H U L H U M U D - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups CthuhuMUD back on new server
:While it's not possible for NiMUD OLC to exist before August of 1993, this posting makes it appear that it wasn't an official feature of CthulhuMUD until October of 1993. There was no mention of making it available to others until the end of 1993 , which was conditional, and private. The first announcement of a public release was on July 29th, 1994 . The interesting part is Locke's insistance that it was publically released in September of 1993 (before becoming a feature of CthulhuMUD, long before the Dec 31st offer to release it to a single person, and ten months before the public release of v1.0) --] 23:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


CircleMUD 2.20 now available at ftp.cs.jhu.eduub/CircleMUD - rec.games.mud.diku |
The statement ''There was no mention of making it available to others'' is false. A late 1993 posting shows a rather loose distribution contract which gave privately distributed copy holders limited liability over distributing copies. "I will admit if this condition is broken I can assume no action can be taken;
CircleMUD 2.20 released Nov 17, 1993
and if so .. so be it. Have a happy new year." Locke, posting with the account of Donald H. Jones at the UK site, home to NiMUD and CthulhuMUD. ] 01:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


NiMUD had been created at this point, and my personal "NiMUD" development site, post-Chris Woodward's involvement:
== SMAUG cite needed ==
NIMUD. - rec.games.mud.diku | Dec 3, 1993


Evidence that OLC was already written:
Ugh. The only cite I could find at the moment is a message out of a flaming thread about Medievia in rec.games.mud.diku, during which time where I was a DikuMUD license violator for not adhering to the greeting credits requirement (which I later corrected). Anyways, here is the message dated Nov 13, 1994 where I state that RoD has... ''True Online building (saves rooms, mobs, objects, resets and mobprograms)'' -- . --] 00:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Looking for online creation code - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Dec 27-31, 1993 ..
I gave it to the one person, then the same day I released it because I felt everybody deserved it.


: Okay 'nuff said. LOL ] 01:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

: After looking at Mozart's announcement in August and yours in September, I thought it might be better to just avoid the issue altogether of when someone is actually sitting down and pounding out the code as unimportant. Also "inspired" by is well understood to be "original" work (from scratch), while "derived" is well understood to be a "derived work" in a legal sense. ] 14:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Monster's customization ==

Since online creation was not in the cited document, the word "customization" (in the tone and words of the original author, Mr. Skrenta) has been chosen. ] 01:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

: It's been discussed and agreed to above that this article is about 'online creation'. You've never answer why you keep changing it, Locke. ] 02:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

: discussed by who? i disagree. the above reason is perfectly adequate reasoning as to why it should not be contained in that part of the article. LOCKE IS NOT HERE. ] 02:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's a quote.
<pre>
Appendix C: Customization Subsystem Menus


Room Customization:
-------------------

Custom> ?

D Alter the way the room description prints
N Change how the room Name prints
P Edit the Primary room description (same as desc)
S Edit the Secondary room description
X Define a mystery message

G Set the location that a dropped object really Goes to
O Edit the object drop description (for drop effects)
B Edit the target room (G) "bounced in" description

T Set the direction that the Trapdoor goes to
C Set the Chance of the trapdoor functioning

M Define the magic object for this room
R Rename the room

V View settings on this room
E Exit (same as quit)
Q Quit (same as exit)
? This list


Exit customization:
-------------------

Custom > ?

A Set an Alias for the exit
C Conceal an exit
D Edit the exit's main Description
E EXIT custom (saves changes)
F Edit the exit's failure line
I Edit the line that others see when a player goes Into an exit
K Set the object that is the Key to this exit
L Automatically look / don't look on exit
O Edit the line that people see when a player comes Out of an exit
Q QUIT Custom (saves changes)
R Require/don't require alias for exit; ignore direction
S Edit the success line
T Alter Type of exit (passage, door, etc)
V View exit information
X Require/don't require exit name to be a verb
? This list


Object Customization:
---------------------

Custom object> ?

A "a", "an", "some", etc.
D Edit a Description of the object
F Edit the GET failure message
G Set the object required to pick up this object
1 Set the get success message
K Set the Kind of object this is
L Edit the label description ("There is a ... here.")
P Program the object based on the kind it is
R Rename the object
S Toggle the sticky bit

U Set the object required for use
2 Set the place required for use
3 Edit the use failure description
4 Edit the use success description
V View attributes of this object

X Edit the extra description
5 Edit extra desc #2
E Exit (same as Quit)
Q Quit (same as Exit)
? This list
</pre> </pre>


<- OLC was made available in December, 1993, thus it had been written earlier than December, 1993.
You are quoting from the command appendix. I've block quoted the authors description of the system in the article. ] 02:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Disambiguation ==

Some stuff in the article suggests there maybe should be a disambiguation page for non-MUD stuff. The ] link sticks out like a sore thumb. Does anybody have suggestions for what to do regarding non-MUD stuff? There could be a link at the top of the page to a disambiguation page which has with links to other non-MUD stuff, like ] does (the main article is about chemistry, the disambiguation page has links for heavy metal music, etc). That's appropriate when the term almost always refers to one thing. We could also move the current one to Online Creation (MUD) and replace the current one with a list of things, with Online Creation (MUD) as the first link, which would be appropriate for stuff where when people think "Online Creation" they don't automatically think of MUDs (which I think is probably the case for most people who don't play MUDs; I myself am involved with MUDs and even I don't think that online creation is especially specific to MUDs). A third option would be to just ignore non-MUD stuff, and not have such links to ] derivatives and all that. I personally would prefer the latter and just leave out the non-MUD stuff. What are other peoples' opinions on this? ] (] • ]) 12:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

: I agree with the third option. I simply don't see the relevance or connection. ] 13:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

: I agree with the third option, too. I never seem to hear this term in a non-MUD context. 3D Engines generally refer to this as 'in game editing' or somesuch (Doom3, Torque, etc). And they seem to consider it a much smaller deal than the MUD community does. ] 15:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Second archive ==
I also made a 2nd archive of the talk page as it was getting quite long. ] 13:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Constant reverts ==
Also there were 3R's here also with Locke continually changing the terms 'online creation' to something else:
# (cur) (last) 21:19, 14 February 2006 Young Zaphod m
# (cur) (last) 21:08, 14 February 2006 68.162.148.34 (rv Nope.)
# (cur) (last) 20:49, 14 February 2006 Young Zaphod m (?Monster)
{{unsigned|Jlambert}}

== Seemingly random ]'s "Dave" reference ==
Locke is not here. ] 20:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

:"www.cheechandchong.com is my finest work." - m_m (Locke) You and Locke share another common interest. ] 22:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

== bunch of stuff ==

The description summary didn't fit, here's what I was going to put for my last edit: talk page has no mention of weasel words, removing weasel template; "customization" link when "customization" is not used anywhere in specific; "online"->"in-game" since "online creation" makes Locke sad; correcting Armageddon ("privately" distributed, but "released"?); removing the part about SOI influencing MUME since SOI's web site says it started in 2002; removing the periodically updated open source part, since every single thing listed here has had more than 1 release, and it wasn't initated as an open source project, but eventually became one in 1994; removing list of claims by Locke since that's more appropriate for the talk page; getting rid of legal mumbo jumbo since Jlambert is right in that it isn't really that important here, but maybe on the NiMUD article; getting rid of both "citeneed" things since there doesn't seem to be anything supporting them; removing Sauerbraten (game) link since there seems to be consensus about limiting this article to MUDs
--] (] • ]) 22:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

You can say its customization because the appendixes refer to the commands as "Customization", rather than in-game. ] 23:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
:Well, the command is called customization, and described as creation, it probably should be referred to as online creation I guess. ] (] • ]) 23:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

:While we're on the subject, why exactly *can't* we say in-game creation or online creation? I'd like to hear your reasoning, Mr 151. If it's really just what the cite says, I'll be happy to provide an alternate citation that refers to Monster's features as online creation. ] 23:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

:: Pulled from the Mediation thing: ''Well, I disagree with this because his parents are very proud of the fact that he and Locke coined the term "Online Creation" and because it wasn't in general use before that. Its the only thing they have left of him, and it was his only influence on the world. He should be duly credited with releasing the first OLC for Diku because that is what he and Locke did. Eggster 14:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)''. That's him talking about hisself in third person. He's a sick puppy in my opinion, which ought not count for much, but I feel I ought to say it. ] 00:44, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:::That's very disrespectful, I hope that my "friends" don't tell everyone that I've made no significant mark on the world, and that they need to spread misinformation about me in order to follow my last wishes :( --] (] • ]) 00:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:::: True, we might think so but I don't think he can help it. I don't intend that link there to be any sort of personal attack. I am not without empathy, but it explains itself. ] 01:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Yeah, I saw that. But since the legs have been cut out from under that assertion (it certainly was in general use) I'm wondering if there's some other kind of rationale behind the reverting that we can address to reach a compromise. Otherwise this article seems to be on the road to RFC/Arbitration. ] 02:21, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Whatever, man, you're opinions someone else's opinions, anonymous contributions to the lie machine. ALA: Who cares. ] 03:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:::: You haven't answered the question posed. Also I've been told to formally ask you if 151.201.48.208/Young Zaphod/Eggster/68.162.148.34/66.101.59.248/151.201.32.118 or any others are you Herbert "Locke" Gilliand author of NiMUD? If so which and which not? ] 19:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

== weasel words ==
Would the person who placed ''"This article contains weasel words, which may compromise its neutrality. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page."'' please place a relevant discussion on the talk page? Thanks in advance. --] (] • ]) 12:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

: It would be helpful to state what those weasel words are, why and what they should be changed to here. ]

::The template is worded in such a way as to encourage people to fix the problems of the article; however, lack of discussion on the talk page means that whoever notices and tries to fix it will just be sent on a wild goose chase trying to find this "relevant discussion on the talk page" which they're supposed to look at. That tag should not be added until after the problems have been mentioned on the talk page, with specific mention of it (such as "This is why I am adding the weasel words tag..."). I would suggest that the tag should be removed until there actually -is- a relevant discussion here; as the tag is referring to a non-existant thing. It was added more than 24 hours ago, I think it's reasonable to think that if the tag was added on the article first, with intent to discuss it here immediately afterward, then it would have been put on here by now. --] (] • ]) 01:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

== How NiMUD OLC First Got Distributed ==

<pre>
I will admit if this condition is broken I can assume no action can be taken;
and if so .. so be it.
</pre>

Taken from a 1993 usenet posting called "online creation code!!"
] 00:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

:Perhaps a few more of the headings should have "Seemingly random" in them. --] (] • ]) 01:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

== OLC Tree ==

<pre>


Start
Abridged OLC Tree |
V
AberMUD<--------------Monster ('some object creation features')
/(no OLC) (1988)
/ | ||
/ | \/
/ LP <---------------TinyMUD
Diku / | \
(no OLC) / | \
/ | \ TinyMUCK | TinyMUSH 1.0
Circle | \ MOO / \
| | \ DUM MUSE TinyTIM
| RPIMUD* \ MUG \ /
| \ PernMUSH
Sam's OLC (MUME) Merc (no OLC) / \
| | \ PennMUSH TinyMUSH 2.0
| | \ |
Oasis NiMUD (Isles)** \ |
| Online Creation SMAUG TinyMUX
| |
RoAOLC |
ILAB/OLC
/ | \
/ | \
Ivan's ROMolc EnvyOLC


* Contains Armageddon's Creation Code by Jhalivar
** Most widely distributed in derived works.

Copyright (c) 2006 Herb Gilliland. All rights reserved.
Used with permission on Misplaced Pages under Creative Commons Limited License.
</pre>

:I've fixed up the MUSH side a bit, but it's still missing some intermediate steps (like MicroMUSE and TinyTIM) and it's not as reflective of some of the cross feature mixing as it should be. I dunno if layout will cooperate with putting a tree like this in the article while maintaining accuracy - The real derivations are more complicated than this. ] 18:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

] is actually based off ] I think. Where does ] fit in? ] 23:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

:The rec.games.mud FAQ says it's another TinyMUD derivitive, with jives with my recollection. I don't remember it being all that widespread or popular, though. ] 16:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


::Well done.] 16:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

::Regarding the SMAUG move: Thoric said he based it off Mozart, which is based on Oasis. ] 16:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
:::MozartOLC was written from scratch, and so was SMAUG OLC. --] 15:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

:The earliest mention of DUM on Usenet is May '90. I think it's an original work in itself. (inspiration might have been Tiny or Aber or both). The Monster-Aber connection if there is any would have to go the other way as Aber was written in 1987 before Monster. Oasis OLC(96) postdates Mozart(94) by two years. ] 17:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

:Further examination reveals it's probably based on CircleMUD OLC. ] 23:55, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

==Articles for Deletion debate==
This article survived an ] debate. The discussion can be found ]. -] ] 12:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

== RfM on Ehheh, Atari2600tim, sock puppets / mousekateers of jlambert ==

{{tl|RFMF}} <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!-- -->


] (]) 18:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


:There's a usenet post about considering a private release at Dec 31 1993, so the first release would have been January 1994, except there's only proof of the 1.0 release in mid 1994. I failed to find a usenet post of a public release or leak prior to that. --] (]) 19:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
In case any other editors come along and see this, this article isn't under mediation - the request was rejected as ] 15:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)


There is no reason to write "Copyright 1994" when it's obviously "Copyright 1993". We're here to prove that it WAS WRITTEN, not RELEASED by the end of 1993, not 1994 as this erroneous article states. ] (]) 05:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
== Tim's edit on 4/20/06 ==


== First MUD with online creation ==
I think Ehheh just changed both places where he saw 1993 without looking at the context, when he recently changed it to say that NiMUD was written and first released in 1994. It was first given out to the public on July 29, 1994. However, it obviously was written either during that day, or before that day. I don't think it is of any significance whether it started on Jan 1 94 or whether it started in 1993, so I'm just going to remove that part. One can assume that he started on it at some point prior to when he gave it out to people. I myself made the mistake of reverting both dates when I misread one of the recent diffs, so I can obviously sympathize with what happened. --] (] • ]) 12:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


The line "The first publicly available mud that featured in-game creation of the game world was Monster" is wrong. The first publicly-available MUD that did this was ''Gods''; it was also "invented" by the IOWA system (they called them "multi-user player-extensible games"). See for details.
:Under the above "dating of nimud" section, the conflict had previously been resolved. Information has been revised. ] 01:27, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


The usual warnings about "first" apply, though. The reason that ''Monster'' is important is not that it was first, because it wasn't; rather, it's because today's MMOs descend along a line that passes through ''Monster''. ''Gods'' (and perhaps the IOWA MUDs) may have got there first, but they didn't propagate the idea to the present day. You can't even cut ''MUD'' version 2 out of the definition by invoking a "public release" clause, because it was released publicly. The term you're looking for is that ''Monster'' was the '''progenitor''' of today's in-world object creation. It's not the first, but it's the one from which current practice descends.
::Yes, a consensus has been reached that it was written in '93 and released in '94, as the "dating of nimud" section says. Is the time that it was written in any way relevant to this article though? I would say that the public release is of some significance because that's when people other than you and a few friends could start using it. However, when it was written is fairly insignificant, and makes it hard for readers to see the difference between them. As I pointed out, Ehheh actually edited both 1993's and changed them to 1994 (thus making the writing time wrong), and you yourself changed both to 1993 (thus making the release time wrong). I myself looked at both of your changes and didn't realize that they were regarding different info (I thought it was redundant until I read the entire paragraphs). I don't think having the extra time adds anything to this article. When you "revised" the article, you also made it say that it was released in 1993, so obviously having it there adds some confusion. --] (] • ])


] (]) 12:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
== incessant edit barbarism ==


"Historical Notes:
summed up with the image ] 12:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Although the present system went live in October 1988, Gods began in 1985 as a non-commercial MUA; its author was inspired by MUD1 to write his own game, and was among the first people to do so. Gods was Shades' only rival to be the Prestel Micronet MUA.


Review:
== Vanity in Emlen ==
The dominant concept in Gods, which permeates every facet of it, is that of object creation. Instead of becoming a wiz when one gains the appropriate experience points, one becomes a 'god'. Gods have the ability to alter the game at will, but doing so costs them points. When mortals cash in treasure for points, they take it to the temple of their favoured god. This will add to that god's points, as well as to their own. Thus, popular and respected gods will be able to make more changes to the game, and ones that are unpopular will lose the ability." Here it is called "Object Creation" .. by the way, why does this article focus on online MUD level editing, rather than just "OLC" which is Online Creation? Isn't that too broad of a scope for this article? ] (]) 08:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


:The article focuses on level editing mainly because the article was originally created by Herb Gilliland in order to back up some incorrect stuff in his NiMUD article, and much of the effort on this article has been spent correcting misinformation rather than expanding the article. If it was up to me, there wouldn't be a MUD-specific article about level editing because I don't think there's enough unique stuff about MUDs to make this article rather than adding onto other video game articles; perhaps other people have the same view as me and that'd be why they haven't added much to it. ] (] • ]) 23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Why is there mention of the creator's email in the Emlen section? ] 13:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


:: Highly debatable, ] ... I am fairly certain that you are of no level of credible expertise to make such commentary. Furthermore, I wanted to mention that _no one_ has revised this article since Dr. Bartle revealed the Gods fact. Also, no one addresses the fact that "object creation" and "level editing" have little to do with the OLC software package released in 1993. I'd say the authors of this article were just being mean to the person who created the article, considering you have deleted almost every single reference to him in the last 405321960 revisions, and have continually kept the copyright dates measured incorrectly on this article. I doubt the primary editors of this article are at all interested in anything other than their continuing expression of FUD, and suppression of any and all speech that comes from anyone whom even may be incorrectly determined as the same person(s) as the initiator of this article. Also, someone has been redacting references to The Isles OLC / ILAB OLC on other articles even when they are factually correct (see the ] article). ] (]) 17:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
:Well I have no idea. It's probably because the editor is new to wikipedia. I removed it. ] 01:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


:::"I am fairly certain that you are of no level of credible expertise to make such commentary" Perhaps logging in to an account and referring to yourself in the first person might make other people feel that you yourself have some level of credibility, and maybe even raise it up to the level of my own.
== Online Creation: Original Research? ==
:::"Also, no one addresses the fact that "object creation" and "level editing" have little to do with the OLC software package released in 1993." The article seems to specifically say that Armageddon which made its way into SillyMUD (I assume that's what you're talking about, since it was released in 1993) allowed builders to create "zones, rooms, exits, objects, and mobiles". Why would it say that it had little to do with those things?
:::"...suppression of any and all speech..." You posted that February 12 and I can look at it right now April 10; if I waited 2 more days then it'd be 2 months later. Obviously nobody's suppressing speech. The talk page or your user space is where speech goes, the article is where articles go. Blatantly obvious incorrect stuff doesn't belong in the article, but is perfectly fine as speech. ] (] • ]) 21:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


== ] ==
Hi.


This should be mentioned. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I'm currently investigating whether this article conforms with Misplaced Pages's content policies. In particular, what I am questioning is whether the term "online creation" is a recognized concept deserving of an encyclopedic article exists.


Why? It has nothing to do with: MUDs, "OLC", text-based adventure games, "object and room creation" or the 1993 release of the "online creation package" which FYI has been completely eliminated from this lame article. ] (]) 07:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
To clarify, it's clear that there are MUDs and programs that allow what is described herein as "online creation." What's not clear is that any ] has used that term. My worry is that describing the term as a concept unto itself, in the way this article does, violates Misplaced Pages's core content policy on ].


: It looks to me like it's quite relevant. From that article: "The engine has won awards for its advanced support of online creation" (then goes on to list specific examples). If true, it should be included. I'll update this article appropriately after validating the claims. I don't know where you got the idea that this article was solely about a single obscure software package. If it were, it wouldn't be worth keeping. ] (]) 14:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
It may simply be that I'm unfamiliar with the literature in this area. If so, then the problem is merely that this article doesn't ]. If one of the editors familiar with the article could discuss those sources here, that would be great. Otherwise, I plan on nominating this article for deletion, since it seems that most of the material in it would be better covered in other articles (such as those on MUDs).


== Scope ==


This article has two scopes in one. (1) The majority is about the ability to edit a virtual world within the world itself as a feature of ]s (multi-user dungeons). I haven't found a single ] that describes this feature in any depth, i.e., to use as a reason to create and redirect to an entry of ]. The vast majority of the MUD-related refs in this article are primary sources, unreliable, or only tangentially related to the topic. (2) The second part of the scope—minor in terms of weight within the article—is contemporary ], e.g., for Second Life, and is shoehorned into this concept of "online creation".
Regards, ] 13:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


I'm seeing nothing useful to do with the MUD part, due to lack of source material, and I don't see how this article would be repurposed around user-generated content when there is ]. I'm planning to merge and redirect there. <small>(not ], please <code>{{tl|ping}}</code>)</small> <span style="background:#F3F3F3; padding:3px 9px 4px">]</span> 05:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
:The term 'online creation' is used all over. It's more commonly referred to by the acronym 'OLC', though. Google for +MUD +OLC and you should find a whole raft of stuff. I've never been sure that the concept really deserves an article all to itself, though. A

Latest revision as of 18:25, 10 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Online creation redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find video game sources: "Online creation" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This redirect does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconVideo games
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks
AfDs Merge discussions Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates Good article nominations DYK nominations Reviews and reassessments
Articles that need...

The Isles 15

The Isles 15 came out before 1.1. Though ILAB/OLC was written based on the 1.1 version, OLC had already made its rounds as "TheIsles15" and "TheIsles16" one year earlier. 98.111.199.226 (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Prove it, the only decent source I know of says Jul 29, 1994. There's some evidence of a limited release in early 1994. --Scandum (talk) 16:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

First of all, prove that it wasn't User:Scandum. We're here to prove that it WAS WRITTEN, not RELEASED by the end of 1993, not 1994 as this erroneous article states. Furthermore, OLC was written initially for Merc 2.0, not 2.2 -- we kept updating OLC as they released new versions of Merc throughout 1993. 2.0b was the one I started with I believe. This occurred earlier in the year. As soon as 2.2 was released in October, we were already porting our 2.0b version to 2.2. We did all of our development on MS-DOS using the DJ Delorie GNU C Compiler for MS-DOS. 

Timeline, April 5, 1993 - December 31, 1993
Merc 2.0 released in 1993 : Merc 2.0 Beta released for anon ftp - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups
Already on MSDOS: Merc for dos - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups April, 1993
Already distributed by April 21: Merc 2.0 Beta - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Mid-1993
This is the post that shows Hidden Worlds added their OLC, mid-1993.  It was never distributed and only worked on that mud.  It was written by Kalgen, who also wrote another un-distributed OLC. This was the first one I ever saw on a Merc 
and it was the inspiration for ours though I never immorted -- Chris Woodward did -- our OLC was released only
a few months later: Merc2 Area Editor - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups
Me announcing CthulhuMUD using my friend Chris Tchou's Andrew account: 
Cthulhu MUD - rec.games.mud.diku | Sept 1, 1993 --
this is precisely the time when we wrote OLC for our MUDs. It was only a few weeks/a month later that it was hacked and 
stolen, so we then released it publically. I re-released it several times in 1993 and 1994.  This is the basis for the 
claim of October 15th.  A week or month either way from October 15th is when it was written, period.  I believe
CthulhuMUD was hacked on Halloween, 1993.
Cthulhu MUD the saga continues - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Looking for a site <- Sept 1993
Where's Hidden Worlds..?? - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Hidden Worlds goes down
Hidden Worlds is back up! - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Hidden Worlds back up!
CircleMUD 2.11 now available at ftp.cs.jhu.eduub/CircleMUD - rec.games.mud.diku | 
Sept 19, 1993, Circle 2.11 released
Cthulhumud - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups User looking for CthulhuMUD October 7th, 1993
C T H U L H U M U D - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups CthuhuMUD back on new server
CircleMUD 2.20 now available at ftp.cs.jhu.eduub/CircleMUD - rec.games.mud.diku | 
CircleMUD 2.20 released Nov 17, 1993
NiMUD had been created at this point, and my personal "NiMUD" development site, post-Chris Woodward's involvement: 
NIMUD. - rec.games.mud.diku |  Dec 3, 1993
Evidence that OLC was already written: 
Looking for online creation code - rec.games.mud.diku | Google Groups Dec 27-31, 1993 ..
I gave it to the one person, then the same day I released it because I felt everybody deserved it.

<- OLC was made available in December, 1993, thus it had been written earlier than December, 1993.

98.111.199.226 (talk) 18:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

There's a usenet post about considering a private release at Dec 31 1993, so the first release would have been January 1994, except there's only proof of the 1.0 release in mid 1994. I failed to find a usenet post of a public release or leak prior to that. --Scandum (talk) 19:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

There is no reason to write "Copyright 1994" when it's obviously "Copyright 1993". We're here to prove that it WAS WRITTEN, not RELEASED by the end of 1993, not 1994 as this erroneous article states. 98.111.199.226 (talk) 05:32, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

First MUD with online creation

The line "The first publicly available mud that featured in-game creation of the game world was Monster" is wrong. The first publicly-available MUD that did this was Gods; it was also "invented" by the IOWA system (they called them "multi-user player-extensible games"). See for details.

The usual warnings about "first" apply, though. The reason that Monster is important is not that it was first, because it wasn't; rather, it's because today's MMOs descend along a line that passes through Monster. Gods (and perhaps the IOWA MUDs) may have got there first, but they didn't propagate the idea to the present day. You can't even cut MUD version 2 out of the definition by invoking a "public release" clause, because it was released publicly. The term you're looking for is that Monster was the progenitor of today's in-world object creation. It's not the first, but it's the one from which current practice descends.

RichardBartle (talk) 12:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

"Historical Notes: Although the present system went live in October 1988, Gods began in 1985 as a non-commercial MUA; its author was inspired by MUD1 to write his own game, and was among the first people to do so. Gods was Shades' only rival to be the Prestel Micronet MUA.

Review: The dominant concept in Gods, which permeates every facet of it, is that of object creation. Instead of becoming a wiz when one gains the appropriate experience points, one becomes a 'god'. Gods have the ability to alter the game at will, but doing so costs them points. When mortals cash in treasure for points, they take it to the temple of their favoured god. This will add to that god's points, as well as to their own. Thus, popular and respected gods will be able to make more changes to the game, and ones that are unpopular will lose the ability." Here it is called "Object Creation" .. by the way, why does this article focus on online MUD level editing, rather than just "OLC" which is Online Creation? Isn't that too broad of a scope for this article? 98.111.199.195 (talk) 08:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The article focuses on level editing mainly because the article was originally created by Herb Gilliland in order to back up some incorrect stuff in his NiMUD article, and much of the effort on this article has been spent correcting misinformation rather than expanding the article. If it was up to me, there wouldn't be a MUD-specific article about level editing because I don't think there's enough unique stuff about MUDs to make this article rather than adding onto other video game articles; perhaps other people have the same view as me and that'd be why they haven't added much to it. Atari2600tim (talk • contribs) 23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Highly debatable, Atari2600tim ... I am fairly certain that you are of no level of credible expertise to make such commentary. Furthermore, I wanted to mention that _no one_ has revised this article since Dr. Bartle revealed the Gods fact. Also, no one addresses the fact that "object creation" and "level editing" have little to do with the OLC software package released in 1993. I'd say the authors of this article were just being mean to the person who created the article, considering you have deleted almost every single reference to him in the last 405321960 revisions, and have continually kept the copyright dates measured incorrectly on this article. I doubt the primary editors of this article are at all interested in anything other than their continuing expression of FUD, and suppression of any and all speech that comes from anyone whom even may be incorrectly determined as the same person(s) as the initiator of this article. Also, someone has been redacting references to The Isles OLC / ILAB OLC on other articles even when they are factually correct (see the Rivers of MUD article). 71.199.121.3 (talk) 17:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
"I am fairly certain that you are of no level of credible expertise to make such commentary" Perhaps logging in to an account and referring to yourself in the first person might make other people feel that you yourself have some level of credibility, and maybe even raise it up to the level of my own.
"Also, no one addresses the fact that "object creation" and "level editing" have little to do with the OLC software package released in 1993." The article seems to specifically say that Armageddon which made its way into SillyMUD (I assume that's what you're talking about, since it was released in 1993) allowed builders to create "zones, rooms, exits, objects, and mobiles". Why would it say that it had little to do with those things?
"...suppression of any and all speech..." You posted that February 12 and I can look at it right now April 10; if I waited 2 more days then it'd be 2 months later. Obviously nobody's suppressing speech. The talk page or your user space is where speech goes, the article is where articles go. Blatantly obvious incorrect stuff doesn't belong in the article, but is perfectly fine as speech. Atari2600tim (talk • contribs) 21:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

HeroEngine

This should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.4.68.112 (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Why? It has nothing to do with: MUDs, "OLC", text-based adventure games, "object and room creation" or the 1993 release of the "online creation package" which FYI has been completely eliminated from this lame article. 71.199.121.3 (talk) 07:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

It looks to me like it's quite relevant. From that article: "The engine has won awards for its advanced support of online creation" (then goes on to list specific examples). If true, it should be included. I'll update this article appropriately after validating the claims. I don't know where you got the idea that this article was solely about a single obscure software package. If it were, it wouldn't be worth keeping. Nandesuka (talk) 14:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Scope

This article has two scopes in one. (1) The majority is about the ability to edit a virtual world within the world itself as a feature of MUDs (multi-user dungeons). I haven't found a single reliable source that describes this feature in any depth, i.e., to use as a reason to create and redirect to an entry of MUD terminology. The vast majority of the MUD-related refs in this article are primary sources, unreliable, or only tangentially related to the topic. (2) The second part of the scope—minor in terms of weight within the article—is contemporary user-generated content, e.g., for Second Life, and is shoehorned into this concept of "online creation".

I'm seeing nothing useful to do with the MUD part, due to lack of source material, and I don't see how this article would be repurposed around user-generated content when there is an existing section for that already. I'm planning to merge and redirect there. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 05:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Categories:
Talk:Online creation: Difference between revisions Add topic