I agree.  This would be a great way for multiple people in the same place to play together.  I've looked, and it seems like you can't have more that one person play on the same machine, is that right?

Regarding the First Founder special effect, I miss that as well - it's just jumping up and down in this version.  However, I should say that the height-extension thing is the c64 - on the Atari 800 - the First Founder got big and fat, which I like even better - it's kind of the "abundance of excess".

I noticed the missing messages about shortages - it's a major thing that should be added, and there are many others, but that all goes into making the as close to the original as possible. 

I remember the developers saying they took collusion out because there was no face to face contact, and that makes sense, though I think there could be a way to implement it.  However, I should say that having played dozens of games back in the day, there was an inherent flaw: you couldn't stop someone else who was sitting there from jumping in - they just had to press the button at the same time, and the only solution was to tell the person to stop.  Not a well implemented feature in the original game.  You could also use collusion if you were selling a plot of land, which we never used, as far as I know.  In that scenario, the seller would actually choose who to sell the land to.  Perhaps that would be a better way to proceed in the goods auction - the seller chooses who to collude with.

I agree with most of the suggestions here - it should have a few modes:

1. Classic - as close as possible to the original, "mistakes" and all (though original graphics and sound are optional - for those purists, the emulator is always available).

2. Classic with tweaks - using that as a template, a whole mess of optional variations - cost and volatility of resources, frequency of events, intelligence of A.I., etc.)  This way, it could be anything from just like the original with 1 or two changes that people feel are out of balance in the original, to completely wacky and strange, but still basically the same game.

3. Enhanced mode with new features - new commodities, new events, longer games, more land - anything the developers dream up that makes the game fun.

I think there is plenty of room in one version of M.U.L.E. for all this (though the basics should be covered first), though I would certainly understand if with all this work, whoever developed this product wanted to charge for it.  Certainly, if one were to charge even $15-$20, there should be more "bang for the buck" than just the original game.

A great example of this approach is the remake of a game many here might be familiar with, and which I always thought of as the "sister" game to M.U.L.E. - Archon.  Over at ReactGames, they are doing all these things.  The graphics and music are enhanced, but they have been tweaking the gameplay to make it exactly like the original, with the same rules, the same board, and everything.  Then, there is an enhanced mode, with some new elements, then a crazy mode, with all kinds of additions, and finally, a Conquest game, which takes the engine and uses it in a completely different way.  In addition, there are tweaks that can be turned on or off in most of the modes.

M.U.L.E. could have all these things, but it would probably be more, because at the core, I think it's a deeper game, and there are so many parameters that could be played with.  I see it as a beginning of turn-based strategy games, and we see how complex they have gotten.  However, I do like the idea that a few people can sit down to a game of M.U.L.E. that is complete in an hour, and I hope that element is always available.

I agree that if there's an obvious flaw or limitation, it should be fixed, but this doesn't feel like that to me.  I just did a three human game with some friends, and this definately came into play as strategy.  Of course we'll never know for sure, since the creator is no longer around, but this definitely feels like something that was playtested and approved, at least to me.  I think that people may have to agree to disagree on this one.

But I do stand by my statement that it's a good idea to recreate the original as a starting point.  It seems like I've seen several postings that say: "I've never played the original, but.." and then proceed to say how it should be changed.  It just seems like it's hard to really know what the best modifications are if not everyone is familiar with how the original plays, and of course, I like the idea of a "Classic" mode - just like the original, with no gameplay tweaks, but with updated graphics and sound. 

This seems like one of those games that could have an advanced page with a whole mess of tweaks and variations, and that could incorporate all these ideas, giving people the choice to use them or not.  I cerainly would like to see something like that.

I have to agree with Lomgren.  This was in the original game, and I think it's an important piece of strategy, that I often made use of - if, for example, I'm the only one with energy, I have to determine how much everyone else is willing to pay, and how many units they will buy, as well as what I can sell it to the store for, in determining whether it's worth it to let the store go off the bottom of the screen.  If I'm only going to sell 1 or 2 units, it may not be worth it.

It's something that could be put in as a variation, but I think that before changing how the game worked originally (and I do agree there are some tweaks that could be done), an effort should be made to bring the gameplay as close as possible to how the original one was.