Re: VRML - The next step?

Mark Waks ([email protected])
Tue, 4 Apr 95 11:31:59 EDT


David writes:
>VRML is really, really,
>exciting - not as an extension to the web, but as the next step in the
>MUSH paradigm. I seriously believe that we should start looking at making
>a 3D interactive MUSH based on already available code for various
>text-based MUSH schemes that already exist.

Okay, two things:

-- First, for those of us who aren't familiar with it, what's different
about MUSH (as opposed to all the other MUDs)? I will caution people
that (IMO) we need to be *very* careful about applying standard MUD
assumptions to VRMUDs -- the bandwidths involved are potentially *quite*
different, and may well imply different structures than the usual
simple server-does-everything that is standard for most MUDs.

-- Second, I'd like to ask people, if they want to talk about the whole
VRMUD thing, to *please* spend a little while digging into the archive
at vrml.wired.com. We've already spent a non-trivial amount of time
talking about the subject, and it would be nice to not have to cover
the same exact ground again. (There's a lot to talk about yet, but
we shouldn't be too redundant.)

-- Justin
Who suspects that the time for a VRML
FAQ/FDT (Frequently Discussed Topics)
approacheth...

Random Quote du Jour:

"One hundred percent of all dead patients showed a marked reluctance to pay
their bills."
-- from "Psychotherapy of the Dead"