I didn't mean to kill humans, also known as Player vs. Player.
What I tried to say is to make dungeons that envolve humans-npcs
Something like a pirate ship, with npcs that are humans and not monsters, orcs, trolls, dragons, whatever.

That would be a little beyond the scope of what we're trying to do here, but it's a good idea.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I think he just means that some of the enemies could be human (species), controlled by a computer, rather than npc characters controlled by a human (player)

_________________
God must love stupid people, he made so many.
theraje: 'God doesn't love stupid people, they're just easier to make'
http://sharedillusions.blogspot.com

god bless you and curse my poor english.

That would mean having types of dungeons (human, non-human) and determining the type of dungeon being generated. For now, the best way to go is just having a standard dungeon filled with monsters.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

So the setting for the MUD going to be typical-fantasy, post-apocalyptic, sci-fi...or???

_________________
Homepage: http://alwayschillin.net
Xbox Live: atlStylin

Fantasy, although by swapping data it could be any type.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

I'm surprised you aren't rooting for a default data-set of Perception-Crash data

_________________
God must love stupid people, he made so many.
theraje: 'God doesn't love stupid people, they're just easier to make'
http://sharedillusions.blogspot.com

Nah, that's not a MUD, it's a Fallout-type single-player RPG. I'll get to it someday.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Hey Machaira,

Do you have an engine up and running or are we just not there yet? :p

No, we're not there yet. Have you read the other threads?

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Yes, I read them. I think we should really start thinking about the code so we can see what we are actually going to be able to do supposed to what we want to do. Xna is well developed but it still has its limitations. It's just a development technique that I picked up from a book. Its called the agile methology, probably heard of it. Where you think the big picture first and then go in to the details last.

I think you misunderstood agile then

Agile doesn't mean you leap straight into code. It means you design the overall system, and then design small parts and code them iteratively to build up a completed system from smaller completed subsections.

Jumping into code at this point would probably just lead to problems because we still have only a very rough idea of what we are doing.

_________________
God must love stupid people, he made so many.
theraje: 'God doesn't love stupid people, they're just easier to make'
http://sharedillusions.blogspot.com

I've already got a ton of code that can be reused from my book so that's not really a problem. We need more design at this point.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Isn't that unit testing? I'm sure methods can be intepreted different ways... I understood it as............ I have a spaceship that shoots a laser to kill enemies but I eventually want to be able to add upgrades to the laser but first I want to get the basic flow of the game programmed so I would worry about that later and just leave a empty method or class called AddUpgrade(); and come back to it once I have an actual game up and running. But I st But I guess this isnt the forum to talk about programming philosophies because we could debate on it forever.


But I guess we don't have enough of the game designed either way, guess I'm a bit too eager to get started.

-pro gammer

I've always interpreted agile programming from a management pov, where you don't plan everything out first. You know your objective and you work towards it one step at a time without worrying too much about what is ahead of you, or how much more difficult the future parts may become because of how you're tackling the present. Agile = programmer adapts.