---
title: "2026 State of the Niche Report"
url: "https://writing-games.org/2026-state-of-the-niche-report/"
canonical: "https://writing-games.org/2026-state-of-the-niche-report/"
type: "post"
published: "2026-06-15T19:33:15-05:00"
modified: "2026-06-15T20:24:11-05:00"
author: "Andruid"
author_url: "https://writing-games.org/author/andruid/"
author_bio: "Andruid (she/her) is a writer, roleplayer, storyteller, and nerd who tries to live by Bill and Ted wisdom, i.e. \"Be excellent to each other.\" She created Writing Games to share lessons learned and to introduce new players to the world of text-based games."
author_same_as:
  - "https://x.com/the_andruid"
  - "https://www.youtube.com/@the_andruid"
  - "https://www.instagram.com/the_andruid/"
  - "https://github.com/the-andruid"
  - "https://bsky.app/profile/andruid.writing-games.org"
  - "https://www.threads.net/@the_andruid"
  - "https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@andruid"
  - "https://www.reddit.com/user/the_andruid"
  - "https://ko-fi.com/andruid"
  - "https://medium.com/@the_andruid"
  - "https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Special:UserProfileActivity/The_Andruid"
publisher: "Writing Games"
publisher_url: "https://writing-games.org/"
categories:
  - "Ideas/Insights"
tags:
  - "Community"
  - "MU*s"
---

# 2026 State of the Niche Report

In May, I ran a [short, anonymous questionnaire](https://www.reddit.com/r/MUD/s/XLB9TaAuLt) about how the MU\* hobby is doing and where people think things are headed.

This post walks through who responded, how they feel about the direction of the niche, and the themes that came out of their written answers.

There's a lot to cover, so let's get started!

## Composition of the sample

Here's how many people took the survey and what the dataset says about them:

### 259 people took the survey

The survey received a total of **259 responses** over the course of 3 weeks, from Saturday, May 3, 2026 to Sunday, May 25, 2026.

The survey was shared on the MUD [subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/MUD/), in Discord servers (MUD, Mudlet, and Evennia), and on the [Brand MU\* Day](https://brandmu.day/) forums. It was also advertised on the [LociTerm](https://lociterm.com/) and [MudVault](https://mudvault.org/) listing sites.

The 259 people who took the survey aren't a random sample, so we can't say that the results "represent" the niche. But the findings *can* give us a sense for where this group is at and what's on their minds.

For those who didn't take the survey (or need a refresher), the full list of survey questions can be found in [Appendix I](#appendix-survey-questions).

**Survey terms used in this report and what they mean:**

*respondent* - A person who took the survey, i.e. a participant.

*n* - The number of people in whatever group is being discussed, i.e. the sample size. So *n = 259* means all 259 respondents, and *n = 41* would be a group of 41 of them.

### 9 in 10 respondents identify as a Player

To start, participants were asked **which roles** common to the hobby apply to them ([Figure 1](#figure-1), [Table 1](#table-1)). Options included *Player*, *Developer*, *Builder*, *Owner*, *Story Runner*, and *Community Manager*. They could also choose *Other* and supply their own role.

- The vast majority of respondents identify as a **Player** (89.2%), and close to half identify as a **Developer** (42.9%).
- About a third identify as a **Builder** (35.1%), followed by **Owner** (25.9%), and **Story Runner** (18.5%).
- Only 12% of respondents said they could be described as a **Community Manager**.
- Only 2 respondents chose the *Other* option. Of those, one wrote "Coder" and the other wrote "Staff."

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Role-distribution_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 1. Distribution of roles across the sample.| Role | Count | Out of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Player | 231 | 89.2% |
| Developer | 111 | 42.9% |
| Builder | 91 | 35.1% |
| Owner | 67 | 25.9% |
| Story Runner | 48 | 18.5% |
| Community Manager | 31 | 12.0% |
| Other | 2 | 0.8% |

Table 1. How respondents answered the question "Which of these roles describes you? (select all that apply)." Because they could select multiple roles, the counts sum to more than 259.#### Number of roles per respondent and role co-occurrence

- Respondents selected **2.24 roles** on average, and 59% chose two or more ([Figure 2](#figure-2), [Table 2](#table-2)).
- **Player + Developer** is the most common combination in the sample (34.4% of all respondents chose both), followed by **Player + Builder** (29.7%) and **Builder + Developer** (22.4%) ([Table 3](#table-3)).
- **Owner + Community Manager** (6.6%) and **Owner + Story Runner** (6.2%) are the least common role combinations.
- Community Managers are nearly twice as likely as the average respondent (81% vs 48%) to also own or develop a game.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Roles-per-respondent-distribution_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 2. Number of roles per respondent across the sample.| Roles selected | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| 1 role | 106 | 40.9% |
| 2 roles | 58 | 22.4% |
| 3 roles | 43 | 16.6% |
| 4 roles | 37 | 14.3% |
| 5 roles | 9 | 3.5% |
| 6 roles | 5 | 1.9% |
| 7 roles | 1 | 0.4% |

Table 2. Number of roles per respondent across the sample.| Role | Player | Developer | Builder | Owner | Story Runner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| **Developer** | 89 (34.4%) |  |  |  |  |
| **Builder** | 77 (29.7%) | 58 (22.4%) |  |  |  |
| **Owner** | 48 (18.5%) | 53 (20.5%) | 45 (17.4%) |  |  |
| **Story Runner** | 47 (18.1%) | 19 (7.3%) | 26 (10.0%) | 16 (6.2%) |  |
| **Community M** | 29 (11.2%) | 23 (8.9%) | 21 (8.1%) | 17 (6.6%) | 18 (6.9%) |

Table 3. Role co-occurrence. Each cell shows the number of respondents who selected *both* roles - the one in its row and the one in its column. For example, 89 respondents are both a Developer and a Player. That's 34.4% of the sample.### 66% of respondents are longtime participants

Survey takers were asked to choose their **level of involvement** in the hobby ([Figure 3](#figure-3), [Table 4](#table-4)). Options were *Longtime participant*, *Returning after time away*, *Just lurking right now,* and *New to the hobby*.

- The majority of respondents are **longtime participants** (66.4%).
- 1 in 5 (20.1%) said they are **returning after time away**, while 8.1% are **just lurking right now**, and 5.4% are **new**.
- Longtimers average more roles than everyone else (2.5 roles vs ~1.5-1.8). They are also more likely to be a Builder (44% vs 17%), Story Runner (23% vs 9%), or Community Manager (16% vs 5%).
- Meanwhile, 6 of the 14 newcomers (43%) are Developers, and 7 (50%) already own or develop a game - similar to longtime participants (47% and 53%). Compared to the other creator roles, Developer does not seem to be one that people accumulate with time.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Level-of-involvement-in-the-hobby_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 3. Levels of involvement in the hobby across the sample.| Involvement | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Longtime participant | 172 | 66.4% |
| Returning after time away | 52 | 20.1% |
| Just lurking right now | 21 | 8.1% |
| New to the hobby | 14 | 5.4% |

Table 4. How respondents answered the question "Which of these best describes your involvement?" They could only choose one option.5.4% may not sound like a lot, but to me, it suggests that there are more newcomers coming in right now than most people realize. At least 14 people found their way into the hobby in/around the month of May, happened to see the survey, and chose to participate. Imagine how many more likely came in under the radar. 🤔

### About 2 in 3 respondents enjoy MUDs the most

Participants were asked to choose the **style of game** they enjoy most ([Figure 4](#figure-4), [Table 5](#table-5)). Options were split into 3 main types, *MUD*, *MUSH*, and *RPI/RPI lite*, plus *Not sure* and *Other*.

- 68% of survey takers enjoy **MUDs** the most.
- 15.8% prefer **MUSHes**, and 12.4% prefer **RPI / RPI-lite** games.
- Of the 6 respondents who chose *Other*, 4 entered "MOO," suggesting that they see it as distinct from the other options.
- Respondents who prefer MUSHes are nearly 3 times as likely to be Community Managers as those who prefer other styles (27% vs 9%).

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Preferred-game-style_pie-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 4. Preferred game style across the sample.| Game Style | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| MUD | 177 | 68.3% |
| MUSH | 41 | 15.8% |
| RPI / RPI-lite | 32 | 12.4% |
| Other | 6 | 2.3% |
| Not sure | 3 | 1.2% |

Table 5. How respondents answered the question "Which style of game do you enjoy most?" They could only choose one option.### Half of respondents are building something

Participants were asked whether or not they're **building or developing anything** right now ([Figure 5](#figure-5)). Options were *Yes* and *No*.

If they said *Yes*, a secondary question asked them to select what kinds of things they're making ([Figure 6](#figure-6), [Table 6](#table-6)). Options included *MU\* game*, *MU\* engine*, *MU\* client*, or *Other tool or service*.

- About half of respondents are building or developing something (51.7%, 134 of 259).
- Of those 134, the vast majority are building a **MU\* game** (81.3%).
- Among those building something, 34% are working on **more than one type of project**.
- No one is building *only* a MU\* client; every one of the 29 client devs is also working on a game, an engine, or another tool.
- 7 of the 14 newcomers to the hobby (50%) are already building something. The newest arrivals are building at the same rate as the sample overall.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Number-of-people-building-something_pie-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 5. Share of respondents who say they're building or developing something right now.![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Project-types-distribution_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 6. Types of projects respondents are working on.| Project Type | Count | Percent of 134 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| MU\* game | 109 | 81.3% |
| MU\* engine | 44 | 32.8% |
| MU\* client | 29 | 21.6% |
| Other tool or service | 21 | 15.7% |

Table 6. How respondents answered the question "What are you making?" They could select multiple types.### Only 6% of respondents say they use assistive tech to participate

Participants were asked whether they **use assistive technology** to take part in the hobby ([Figure 7](#figure-7), [Table 7](#table-7)). Options were *Yes*, *No*, and *Prefer not to answer*.

If they said *Yes*, a secondary question asked them to select what kinds of assistive tech they use ([Figure 8](#figure-8), [Table 8](#table-8)). Options included *Screen reader*, *Screen magnification*, and *High contrast*, with the option to specify an *Other*.

- The overwhelming majority (92.7%) of respondents **do not use assistive tec**h to participate in the hobby.
- 15 (5.8%) do use assistive tech.
- Of those, just over half (8 of 15) use a **screen reader**.
- Of the 2 respondents who chose *Other*, one wrote "ANSI color customization" and the other wrote "voice input."
- 4 respondents preferred not to answer.
- On the 1-to-5 sentiment question (covered in the next section), assistive tech users are similar to the sample overall (mean 3.40 vs 3.33).

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Assistive-technology-use-distribution_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 7. Assistive technology use among respondents.| Response | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| No | 240 | 92.7% |
| Yes | 15 | 5.8% |
| Prefer not to answer | 4 | 1.5% |

Table 7. How respondents answered the question "Do you use assistive technology to take part in the hobby?" They could only choose one option.![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Kinds-of-assistive-technology-distribution_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 8. Kinds of assistive tech used by the 15 respondents who answered *Yes*.| Assistive tech selected | Number of Respondents |
|---|---|
| Screen reader | 8 |
| Screen magnification | 4 |
| High contrast | 3 |
| Other | 2 |

Table 8. Kinds of assistive tech reported by the 15 users. They could select more than one, so the counts add up to more than 15.### 41% of respondents are happy with where things are headed

Participants were asked to rate how they feel about **the direction the niche is heading in**, on a scale from 1 (Unhappy) to 5 (Happy) ([Figure 9](#figure-9), [Table 9](#table-9)).

- The **average rating is 3.33**, sitting just above the neutral midpoint of 3.
- 41.3% of respondents are **happy** (gave a rating of 4 or 5), and an equal 41.3% are **neutral** (gave a rating of 3).
- 17.4% are **unhappy** (gave a rating of 1 or 2).
- Setting aside the neutral 3s, happy respondents outnumber unhappy ones by more than 2 to 1.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/State-of-the-Niche-2026-Sentiment-column-chart.webp)Figure 9. Distribution of sentiment ratings (1 = Unhappy, 5 = Happy).| Rating | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| 1 (Unhappy) | 14 | 5.4% |
| 2 | 31 | 12.0% |
| 3 (Neutral) | 107 | 41.3% |
| 4 | 69 | 26.6% |
| 5 (Happy) | 38 | 14.7% |

Table 9. How respondents answered the question "How do you feel about the direction the niche is heading in?"#### Sentiment by level of involvement

- **Longtimers are the most content** (n=172, mean 3.42, only 11.6% unhappy) - the people who've stuck around are the happiest.
- **Lurkers are the unhappiest** (n=21, mean 2.86, 33% unhappy, only 24% happy) - they represent the one segment whose average sits below neutral (3 rating).
- **Returners (n=52) carry elevated unhappiness** compared to longtimers (25% vs 11.6% unhappy) even though their average is 3.25. It seems like a quarter of them return and don't like what they find.
- **Newcomers (n=14) are bimodal** - their average looks okay (3.29), but they have the *highest* unhappy share (36%) alongside a healthy happy share (43%).

#### Sentiment by game style, role, and building activity

- The largest sentiment gap is by preferred game style - MUD fans average 3.53 while MUSH fans average 2.85 (49.2% vs 19.5% happy) ([Table 10](#table-10), [Figure 10](#figure-10)).
- Community Managers report the highest average (3.65) among the roles and the lowest unhappy share (3.2%). Respondents who selected only the Player role average 3.11.
- Respondents who are making something are slightly happier on average than those who aren't (3.48 vs 3.18). Within the MUSH group, those making something average 3.28 vs 2.52 for those who aren't.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Average-sentiment-by-game-style_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 10. Average sentiment by preferred game style (1 = Unhappy, 5 = Happy).| Game Style | Respondents | Average sentiment | % Happy (4-5) | % Unhappy (1-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MUD | 177 | 3.53 | 49.2% | 13.0% |
| MUSH | 41 | 2.85 | 19.5% | 24.4% |
| RPI / RPI-lite | 32 | 3.00 | 31.2% | 28.1% |
| Other | 6 | 2.67 | 16.7% | 50.0% |
| Not sure | 3 | 3.33 | 33.3% | 0.0% |

Table 10. Average sentiment rating by preferred game style, with the share of each style's respondents who are happy (4-5 rating) or unhappy (1-2 rating).### 1 in 5 respondents thinks they'll be more involved in a year

Participants were asked where they see themselves in the hobby **one year from now** ([Figure 11](#figure-11), [Table 11](#table-11)). Options were *More involved*, *About the same*, *Less involved*, and *Not sure*.

- The majority of respondents expect to stay **about the same** (60.2%).
- 20.5% expect to be **more involved** in a year.
- 8.9% expect to be **less involved**, and 10.4% **aren't sure**.
- Respondents who expect to be more involved next year are about *twice as likely* to be making something (66%) as those who expect to step back or aren't sure (32%).

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/State-of-the-Niche-2026-One-year-from-now-column-chart.webp)Figure 11. One-year outlook distribution among the sample.| Outlook | Count | Percent of 259 Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| About the same | 156 | 60.2% |
| More involved | 53 | 20.5% |
| Not sure | 27 | 10.4% |
| Less involved | 23 | 8.9% |

Table 11. How respondents answered the question "Where do you see yourself in the hobby 1 year from now?" They could only choose one option.### 76% of respondents had thoughts to share about the hobby

The survey included 3 free-text questions that asked participants to answer in their own words:

1. *What's the most positive thing you see happening in the niche lately?*
2. *What's the most concerning thing?*
3. *Any other thoughts you'd like to share?*

The high-level stats:

- 197 of the 259 respondents (76.1%) wrote an answer in at least one of the three free-text boxes.
- The concerns box had a slightly higher response rate (72.6% of all respondents) than the positives box (70.3%).

The next section of the report analyzes the content of these free-text fields.

## Thematic analysis of free-text responses

For this part of the report, I read every response and identified the recurring themes, like *the hobby is innovating* or *the playerbase is shrinking*.

Each theme received a short code (e.g. *Innovation*, *Loss of players*) that is used as shorthand through the rest of the report. The theme coding was done by hand, over multiple passes, and a rubric was created for consistency ([Appendix II](#appendix-coding-rubric)).

Two things to keep in mind when reading the results:

- One response can raise several themes, so percentages can sum to more than 100%.
- Percentages represent the share of the 197 respondents who wrote a free-text answer (out of 259 total).

### Top concerns among respondents

Respondents' concerns range from the number of players to the health of the community to the decline in games, as well as things like using AI to write content and the aging of the hobby.

[Table 12](#table-12) lists the **10 most common concerns**, along with example phrases pulled from the responses:

| \# | Theme | Concern Code | Respondents | In their own words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The playerbase keeps shrinking | *Loss of players* | 36 (18%) | "The undeniable loss of player base over time." |
| 2 | AI is flooding the niche with low-value content | *AI concerns* | 33 (17%) | "LLMs producing poor content." |
| 3 | There just aren't enough players | *Lack of players* | 30 (15%) | "There are more games than players!" |
| 4 | The hobby is stuck on old tech and old habits | *Stagnation* | 30 (15%) | "Reliance on telnet and keyboards." |
| 5 | Players' expectations are shifting | *Player expectations* | 23 (12%) | "Players demanding MUDs be more like modern AAA gaming." |
| 6 | Communities can be toxic and hostile | *Toxicity* | 20 (10%) | "Toxic behavior scaring away new players." |
| 7 | The community is fraying or closing off | *Community problems* | 15 (8%) | "An unwillingness to be OOCly more open and collaborative." |
| 8 | The hobby is graying / aging out | *Aging playerbase* | 15 (8%) | "Not enough young people to carry on the game when we retire." |
| 9 | A small crowd is spread too thin | *Fragmentation* | 13 (7%) | "…those who are interested are spread across MU\*s." |
| 10 | The quality of games and writing is slipping | *Decline in quality* | 13 (7%) | "My home MUD has dramatically decreased in quality recently." |

Table 12. The ten most-cited concerns. Percentages are out of the 197 respondents who wrote a free-text answer.### Top positives among respondents

On the positive side, respondents most often pointed to the hobby's creativity and community. Innovation, a welcoming community, and active building top the list, with new players and renewed interest close behind.

[Table 13](#table-13) lists the **10 most common positives**, along with examples pulled from the responses:

| \# | Theme | Positive Code | Respondents | In their own words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The hobby is innovating | *Innovation* | 30 (15%) | "New developments in engines and building tools." |
| 2 | The community is welcoming and supportive | *Welcoming community* | 29 (15%) | "The community in general seems more welcoming than it did in the 90s." |
| 3 | There's a lot of active building and effort | *Activity* | 28 (14%) | "Lots of effort to revive what once was." |
| 4 | New players are arriving | *New players* | 22 (11%) | "Lots of new faces." |
| 5 | There's renewed interest and energy | *Renewed interest* | 22 (11%) | "Lots of new projects and interest." |
| 6 | AI is helping people build | *AI benefits* | 17 (9%) | "AI-assisted development." |
| 7 | Barriers to building are falling | *Lower barriers* | 16 (8%) | "AI has exponentially lowered the barrier to entry for game development." |
| 8 | New games are launching | *New games* | 15 (8%) | "People are still making new games." |
| 9 | The culture is getting healthier and more inclusive | *Improving norms* | 15 (8%) | "Don't see as much racism / overt assholery. Harassment is less tolerated." |
| 10 | The niche is still here and still running | *Persistence* | 12 (6%) | "It still exists and probably always will." |

Table 13. The ten most-cited positive themes. Percentages are out of the 197 respondents who wrote a free-text answer.[Appendix III](#appendix-full-counts) contains a full list of all themes and their counts.

## Key takeaways from the data

Reading the survey numbers and the written answers together, several findings stand out. Each finding gets its own section below, and each section opens with examples in respondents’ own words.

### Player numbers are the most-cited concern

> "Of course, the player pool is not large. The biggest problem a game faces is the 'trickle-in, trickle-out' problem, which basically means players will come and check out a low populated new game, and when they see it isn't very populated, they leave. It's a vicious cycle."
> 
> -- a MUD player

> "The decline. A lot of the technology that supports the hobby is not well documented, a lot of the knowledge is institutional, and there's a general attrition as the barrier to entry is higher for people new to the hobby."
> 
> -- a MUSH player

This will probably surprise no one, but **concerns about player numbers** were cited far more than any other issue. If you combine the *Loss of players* and *Lack of players* themes, you get 63 respondents who brought one or both up in their written answers - that's 32% of the 197 people who wrote a free-text response ([Table 12](#table-12)).

Respondents sometimes raised the issue alongside other worries ([Table 14](#table-14)).

- The most common pairings were stagnation (clinging to old tech, a refusal to evolve) and an aging playerbase - each cited by 9 respondents (14%).
- Some also expressed concerns about AI, poor reach (lack of awareness of MU\*s, lack of recruiting), outside headwinds (real life, competing media, and other pressures from outside the hobby), and toxic behavior - each cited by 4 respondents (6%).

| Raised alongside player numbers | Respondents | Percent of 63 |
|---|---|---|
| *Stagnation* | 9 | 14% |
| *Aging playerbase* | 9 | 14% |
| *AI concerns* | 4 | 6% |
| *Poor reach* | 4 | 6% |
| *Outside headwinds* | 4 | 6% |
| *Toxicity* | 4 | 6% |

Table 14. Concerns most often cited alongside player numbers.So, who is framing it as a lack, and who is framing it as a loss?

- Respondents who prefer roleplaying-focused games (MUSHes and RPIs) tend to **frame it as a loss** (16) more often than a lack (5). Those who prefer MUDs don't lean one way or the other.

Lastly, related to player numbers:

- More respondents worry the existing player pool is spread too thin across too many games (13) than worry that it's over-concentrated in a few (4), though both issues were cited as concerns (coded as *Fragmentation* and *Concentration*, respectively).

### Respondents are split on whether the hobby is stuck or moving forward

> "Old school owners and admins that refuse to change. It’s been the death of our segment. We could have evolved but we would never. We were too busy with drama and worrying about sh\*t that didn’t matter."
> 
> -- a MUD player

> "I tend to find the most encouragement coming between those building/developing games and experimenting with more modern mechanics that take out some of the old headaches/less fun parts of MUDs. There's many people that share ideas and inspire each other as they try to keep the genre alive."
> 
> -- a MUD player

**Is the hobby stuck in its ways, or is it moving forward?** While the survey didn't ask this question specifically, *Stagnation* and *Innovation* were two recurring yet opposite themes that appeared in the written responses.

Respondents fall into two camps, with some overlap:

- 30 respondents (15%) say **it’s stuck** - e.g. clinging to telnet and old habits, every game a clone of the last - and 30 (15%) say it’s **full of new ideas**, engines, and tools. Both camps have the same average happiness (3.1).
- 6 respondents are overlapping, naming the hobby as both stuck *and* moving forward at the same time.
- MUSH players are the most optimistic (21% see *Innovation* vs 12% who see *Stagnation*); MUD and RPI players lean slightly toward stuck.
- If we include the respondents who cited *Modernization* as a positive, the "moving forward" camp grows to 37, and the overlap grows to 9 ([Figure 12](#figure-12)).

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Stuck-vs-moving-forward-with-overlap_stacked-column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 12. The number of people who see the hobby as stuck vs moving forward, plus overlap between the two camps (shown as the stacked darker blue).A related stat worth mentioning:

The number of people who worry about games dying or being lost to time (19) isn't far off from the number of people who point to new games as a positive (15). Like the stuck vs. moving comparison, respondents are observing both games falling by the wayside *and* new ones coming into existence.

### AI is the 2nd most common concern *and* a top-10 positive

> "Slop has a lot of people completely misrepresenting the quality of their work. It's especially concerning because some people whose writing I've always adored for creativity and beauty have fallen into lazy AI content and they don't seem to care. I've always been proud of our hobby for cultivating talent and seeing that fade has been very difficult."
> 
> -- an RPI player

> "AI-assisted development. It lowers the barrier to entry for more people to contribute to our game. It helps even veterans, like me, to implement trivial and time-consuming things, like expanding GMCP structures for richer client support."
> 
> -- a MUD player

**Is AI good, or is it bad?** This was another question the survey didn't specifically ask, but for which a number of respondents had an opinion.

Respondents fall into two camps - again with some overlap:

- 33 respondents (17%) named AI as a **concern** - more than any other single worry besides loss of players - and 17 (9%) named it as a good thing for the hobby.
- 5 of the 17 who praise AI also flag it as a concern.
- When it comes to AI, the worry appears mainly about **quality and craft** - of the 33 who flag AI, 11 also point to a drop in quality (e.g. "AI slop") and 9 to a loss of creativity.
- On the positive side, 7 of the 17 who praise AI say it **lowers barriers**, making games easier to create and maintain.
- The people who praise AI are the happiest in the whole survey, on average (4.00) ([Table 15](#table-15)). The ones who worry about it are no less happy than everyone else.
- Almost everyone who sees AI purely as a positive is building something themselves: 11 of those 12, against about half (48%) of the people who didn't mention AI ([Table 15](#table-15)). The numbers are small, but AI-fans skew toward the people making games.
- As a concern, AI is more common among RPI players: it’s their single most-cited concern (31%), about double the rate among MUD fans.

| Group | Respondents | Average sentiment | % Building |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI as a positive only | 12 | 3.92 | 92% |
| AI as both positive and concern | 5 | 4.20 | 60% |
| AI as a concern only | 28 | 3.11 | 61% |
| AI not mentioned | 214 | 3.31 | 48% |

Table 15. The 45 respondents who mentioned AI, grouped by how they framed it, with each group’s average sentiment (1 = Unhappy, 5 = Happy) and the share currently building. The 17 who named AI a positive and the 33 who named it a concern overlap in the 5 who did both.### Community and culture are shifting, and not everyone agrees it’s progress

> "The hobby has gotten much less judgmental about preferences and playstyles, and much better about outing bad actors in the community. Bullying and harassment is tolerated much less than it used to be, 10 - 20 years ago."
> 
> -- a MUSH player

> "RPIs shifting away from the grittier edge. While some things needed to be cracked down on (rape and torture RP specifically, especially without consent), the move towards anti-PVP and consent for absolutely everything is making the genre toothless and dull."
> 
> -- an RPI player

**Is the community getting healthier, or is it dragging the hobby down?** **Are changing norms good for the hobby, or are they part of the problem?**

According to the data, more respondents see a problem than progress: 19% (37 of 197) cited a positive, 29% (58 of 197) a concern, and 13 named both.

- In the positives camp, 29 respondents (15%) cite a welcoming and supportive community, and 15 cite improving norms (8%).
- MUSH fans are more likely to cite the positives, followed by those who prefer RPIs ([Table 16](#table-16)).
- 3 respondents went against the trend and suggested that safer, more moderated play has caused the hobby to feel sanitized or controlling, but they are by far in the minority.
- When it comes to concerns, RPI fans are slightly more critical: 46% of them name a community or culture problem vs. 41% of MUSH fans and 23% of MUD fans.
- Shifting player expectations is one of the more commonly-cited concerns: 23 respondents (12%) are worried about things like shorter attention spans or players wanting text games to feel like modern video games.
- Gatekeeping (longtime players pushing newcomers out) is the "unhappiest" theme in the list. The 10 respondents who raised it as a concern average 2.7 vs the 3.33 held by the sample at large.

| Community & culture theme raised | MUD (n=130) | MUSH (n=34) | RPI (n=26) |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Sees it improving (any)** | **15%** | **35%** | **23%** |
| *Welcoming community* | 12% | 21% | 23% |
| *Improving norms* | 3% | 26% | 8% |
| *Less toxicity* | 1% | 18% | 8% |
| **Raises a concern (any)** | **23%** | **41%** | **46%** |
| *Player expectations* | 8% | 18% | 19% |
| *Toxicity* | 8% | 12% | 15% |
| *Community problems* | 4% | 15% | 15% |
| *Gatekeeping* | 4% | 9% | 8% |
| *Staff issues* | 4% | 9% | 4% |

Table 16. Community and culture themes by game style, shown as the share of each style's free-text respondents who raised them. The bold rows count everyone who raised any theme on that side.### Respondents expecting to step back cite different concerns than the unsure

> "The continued congregation of what little players we have left in a handful of games at the top, with an unwillingness to try anything new."
> 
> -- a MUD player

> "Fatalism regarding the future of the hobby, lack of attempts to recruit new players, lack of server diversity due to diminishing player-base."
> 
> -- an RPI player

**What are the concerns of those who plan to leave the hobby? What about those who might be on the fence?**

The 50 respondents who expect to be less involved next year, or aren’t sure, seem to be worried about different things ([Table 17](#table-17)).

- The ones **planning to step back** are unhappy with the **culture**: how player expectations are changing (32%), the state of the community (26%), and a loss of good writing and creativity (21%). Shrinking player numbers come up too (26%), but that isn’t what sets this group apart.
- The ones who **aren’t sure** are worried about **numbers**: a combined 45% cite a loss and/or lack of players, nearly double that of any other concern.

| Rank | Less involved | Not sure |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | *Player expectations* (32%) | *Loss of players* (40%) |
| 2 | *Community problems* (26%) | *Stagnation* (20%) |
| 3 | *Loss of players* (26%) | *AI concerns* (15%) |
| 4 | *Stagnation* (21%) | *Outside headwinds* (15%) |
| 5 | *Loss of creativity* (21%) | *Lack of players* (15%) |

Table 17. The five most-cited concerns in each group. Percentages are out of the members of each group who wrote a free-text answer.Regarding the **people at risk of leaving the hobby**, there's one more finding that I think is worth sharing here:

There were 12 respondents that could name nothing more positive than the fact that the hobby still exists (coded as *Persistence*), and for 7 of them it was their *only* positive. They used phrases like, "People are still playing" and "It's still happening, but it's barely on life support."

These 12 respondents make up the unhappiest "positive-theme" group in the survey (the 12 average 2.75 vs the sample's 3.33), and a third expect to pull back next year - nearly 4x the rate of everyone else.

### Respondents are observing new interest coming in, but...

> "... I think a lot more people would play them if they were more visible and if the newbie experience was less harsh. Most games do not teach players how to play MUDs very well, and modern players just do not have the patience to spend hours learning how to do a new game. I feel like this is the biggest place we can improve in."
> 
> -- a MUD player

> "I wish there were more diverse MUDs, and that the new ones that pop up were advertised better. I only really see ads for the same 5-10 MUDs and don't really know where to find out about new ones as they come out, or beta tests or anything. The community is sort of a fractured black box to me."
> 
> -- an RPI player

Respondents are observing **fresh interest in the hobby** - but they're also saying the hobby does (too) little to reach out or attract new people.

- 22 respondents (11%) cite new players arriving, and 22 (11%) cite renewed interest and energy as positives. A few named both - 41 people in all (21%) pointed to one or the other ([Table 18](#table-18)).
- However, 20 respondents (10%) say the hobby struggles to get noticed and pull people in - games are hard to find, even to people within the niche, and marketing is thin.
- Only 8 (4%) see reach as improving, and they tend to credit new listing sites, aggregators, and growing social-media attention for that.

The issue of reach especially stands out because 10 respondents raised it unprompted in the "any other thoughts" box. It's an area where they feel the hobby could use improvement, and they had practical thoughts on how.

3 suggestions came up among respondents:

1. More/better gateway and listing sites that bring in newcomers, not just recycle the existing crowd.
2. Outreach to audiences next door - tabletop gamers, the Discord roleplay and "BookTok" crowd, short-form video.
3. Good browser and mobile clients that let someone try a game without installing anything first.

| Theme (code) | Side | Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| *New players* | positive | 22 (11%) |
| *Renewed interest* | positive | 22 (11%) |
| *Growing reach* | positive | 8 (4%) |
| *Poor reach* | concern | 20 (10%) |

Table 18. Themes counted in this section, as a share of the 197 respondents who wrote a free-text answer.## Supporting data from the MUD community Discord server

The results from the survey give us an idea of what people are *saying and thinking* about the hobby, but they don't reveal actual behavior. For that, I thought it would be interesting to look at data from the MUD community Discord.

Unlike the survey, the server gives us a window into what people have actually been doing over the past few months (120 days, to be exact - as that's as far back as Discord will let us look).

### Discord membership grew 4% from February through May

- According to the server data, membership rose from a February low of 1,871 to 1,951 on May 30, 2026 (+80, +4.3%). It started climbing in mid-March and held through the survey window (May 3-25) ([Figure 13](#figure-13)). It's not a huge increase, but it is an increase.
- There were roughly 50-60 new joins per month across February, March, April, and May.
- A growing share of newcomers joined the server on their own rather than through an invite: Discord "discovery" joins went from about 10% of monthly joins in March to 23% in May.

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/MUD-Discord-server-membership-over-time_line-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 13. MUD Discord server membership from February 1, 2026 through May 30, 2026.### Development channels are among the most-read on the server

- \#coding is the **fifth most-read channel** (103 readers), behind only #mud (the main game chat), #forum-discussion, #off-topic, and #new-arrivals - and ahead of every individual game's channel, both recruiting channels, and the community channel.
- \#ai is the busiest of the development channels - **601 messages from just 11 posters**, more than #coding (343) and #clients (209) combined. Server-wide it ranks fourth, behind only #mud, #off-topic, and #world-events.
- Messages in the development and building channels make up **24.1% of all messages** (1,255 of 5,217) in the server during the 120-day lookback period ([Figure 14](#figure-14)).

![](https://writing-games.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/MUD-Discord-server-messages-per-category_column-chart_MUD-Survey-2026.webp)Figure 14. Number of messages per channel category, February 1, 2026 through May 30, 2026.## Limitations of the survey and lessons learned

### Composition of the sample

So, as I mentioned early in this report, the 259 people who participated in the survey don't represent a random sample.

It's important to keep in mind that *who participated* was directly affected by when and where the survey was advertised.

The sample - and findings - could have been much different if I hadn't thought to advertise on the Brand MU\* Day forums, for example.

### Confusion around the accessibility question

The accessibility question wasn't as obvious to everyone else as it was to me, and I only learned that after some people had already taken it. That's when I added in some help text around what I considered to be common examples of "assistive tech" in this case.

Aside from that, it probably needed more context about why it mattered. When I had a friend test the survey itself for accessibility, they wondered why the question was even relevant. My response was that there are a lot of different impressions about the number of VI members in the community and what their concerns are. It varies depending on who you talk to - some say they barely encounter any (as far as they know), while others claim their games are populated by 50% or more.

The accessibility question was simply an attempt to address that objectively, even if imperfectly. Once I explained that, my friend understood and agreed, but I have to wonder how many survey takers may have had a similar initial reaction.

### Lessons learned

If I were to do this again, I'd probably run the survey for a shorter length of time, advertise more aggressively, and ask people for help right out of the gates instead of relying on word of mouth.

I was hesitant to pester individuals for fear of skewing the sample toward people I know, but in hindsight, the sample was never going to be random anyway - the number and types of respondents were closely linked to where, when, and how often I posted, so I should have just accepted that and gone all out with my invites.

Likewise, I should have been bolder about dropping a link in more Discord servers. I let "not wanting to be a bother" get in the way of richer results.

That said, I think 259 respondents is a *pretty good turnout* for this kind of thing, and I'd be lying if I said I wasn't at least a little bit relieved that I didn't end up with an even bigger workload. 😅

Lastly, in hindsight, for the "describe your involvement" question, I wish I would have asked newcomers how they managed to find their way into the hobby.

## Shout-outs and thanks

Okay, now for some positive vibes! There were several **named tools and codebases** that popped up in the survey *multiple times*.

To some degree, this was likely due to where the survey was advertised, but it still means something that people think these tools are making a positive impact on the niche:

- [AresMUSH](https://aresmush.com/)
- [CoffeeMUD](https://coffeemud.org/)
- [Evennia](https://www.evennia.com/)
- [GoMUD](https://www.gomud.net/)
- [Mudlet](https://www.mudlet.org/)
- [MudVault](https://mudvault.org/)

[Vineyard.haus](https://vineyard.haus/), [Opie's volunteer project](https://writing-games.org/opie-giving-back-to-the-mud-community/), was also mentioned for its role in preserving the hobby.

My personal thanks to **Rahj** of LociTerm and **Asmodeus** of MudVault for promoting the survey on their listing sites - Rahj had the idea before me.

I also want to thank **Cash** for letting me access the MUD Discord server's Community Insights data.

And lastly, **thank you to everyone who participated** - I appreciate your patience while I sifted through all the data and wrote up the analysis. This project was important enough to me that I didn't feel I could hand it off to AI - especially the thematic coding and analysis.

I also get that there's still some trust involved, even in an anonymous survey, and I appreciate that so many people were willing to take the time.

## Next steps

Even after a 7500-word report, I still feel like the data have more to say - and I hope to do a few more (shorter) write-ups in the future when I get the time.

I also plan to explore options for making the dataset available to the community - it belongs to everyone, in my opinion. Toxicity was a concern that multiple people brought up, though, so I need to think about how to do it responsibly. Probably, this means decoupling the free-text responses from the demographic data for the public dataset, but we'll see.

Well, that's it for me - *phew!* This report was a lot. Thoughts? Concerns? Anything that surprised you? Let me know [in the comments](#comment-responses).

\-- Andruid

## Appendices

### Appendix I: Survey questions

The survey was introduced with: “A short, anonymous survey on how the hobby is doing – and where people think things are headed. Results will be shared with the community after May 24.”

1. **Which of these roles describes you?** (select all that apply) \* Options: Player, Builder, Story Runner, Developer, Community Manager, Owner, Other. Follow-up: “Please list your other roles:”
2. **Which of these best describes your involvement?** \* Options: New to the hobby, Returning after time away, Longtime participant, Just lurking right now.
3. **Which style of game do you enjoy most?** \* Options: MUD, MUSH, RPI / RPI-lite, Other, Not sure. Follow-up: “Please share your preferred game style:”
4. **Are you building or developing anything right now?** \* Options: Yes, No. Follow-up: “What are you making?” with options MU\* game, MU\* engine, MU\* client, Other tool or service (select all that apply).
5. **Do you use assistive technology to take part in the hobby?** \* (e.g. screen reader, high contrast, magnification, braille display, voice input, etc.) Options: Yes, No, Prefer not to answer. Follow-up: “What kinds of assistive tech do you use?” with a “Please share:” write-in.
6. **On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is Unhappy and 5 is Happy, how do you feel about the direction the niche is heading in?** \*
7. **What’s the most positive thing you see happening in the niche lately?** (free text)
8. **What’s the most concerning thing?** (free text)
9. **Where do you see yourself in the hobby 1 year from now?** \* Options: More involved, Less involved, About the same, Not sure.
10. **Any other thoughts you’d like to share?** (free text)

Questions marked with an asterisk (\*) were required. Follow-up questions appeared only when the relevant answer was chosen.

[The live survey](https://surveys.writing-games.org/state-of-the-niche-2026-8nXcSn) is available for anyone wanting to see what it looked like when it ran. While you can technically fill it out, no new responses will be added to this report.

### Appendix II: Coding rubric

All theme coding was done by hand over at least 4 passes per free-text column. The first pass was just to get a sense for the recurring patterns. The second pass laid down the themes and their definitions. The third pass was used to refine them and make sure the boundaries were clear. The fourth pass and spot checks were to ensure that all codes followed the final rubric.

Themes were coded across all three free-text boxes, so a concern raised in the “any other thoughts” box still counts as a concern. Only one new theme arose from the “other thoughts” box and was unique to that question.

### +Positive codes

| Code | Definition |
|---|---|
| Accessibility gains | Disability access specifically: screen readers, assistive technology. |
| Activity | Ongoing development effort: updates, new content, building, general buzz. |
| AI benefits | AI or LLMs framed positively: NPCs, world-building, lowering development effort. |
| Creative output | Artistic and narrative creativity: writers, worlds, expression. |
| Existing players | The dedicated existing base: “people are still playing.” Loyalty of the current population. |
| Growing reach | Visibility and discoverability of the hobby: listing sites, promotion, recruitment efforts. |
| Improving norms | Shifts in social or playstyle conventions and policies: transparency, inclusivity, consent. |
| Innovation | New ideas, mechanics, engines, codebases, and tools; experimentation. |
| Integration | Connecting games with external platforms: web, Discord, crossplay. |
| Less toxicity | Reduction or better management of toxic behavior specifically. |
| Lower barriers | Lower barriers to entry: easier, faster, or cheaper to develop, host, or play. |
| Mobile | Phone and mobile access and clients. |
| Modernization | Updating old things to current standards: modern languages, codebases, clients. |
| MU\* clients | Client software as such: more clients, mobile and web clients, better client tech. |
| Multigenerational | Bridging generations: younger players joining alongside older ones. |
| New games | New games being made or released, plus revivals of old games. |
| New players | Newcomers actually arriving: new faces, growth in player numbers, returning players framed as arrivals. |
| Outside tailwinds | Tailwinds from outside the niche pushing people toward it (MMO fatigue, expensive subscriptions). |
| Persistence | The niche or a game simply still existing or surviving. |
| Preservation efforts | Preserving history, code, and worlds: archives, open-sourcing. |
| Quality-of-life gains | Quality-of-life improvements: convenience features and playability polish. |
| Renewed interest | Expressed enthusiasm, attention, or resurgence, including interest in building or running a game. |
| Standards | Adoption of protocols and technical standards. |
| Technology | Explicit references to technology, tech stacks, or programming languages as the medium. |
| Uniqueness | The medium offers an experience other formats don’t replicate. |
| Web | Web-based access: browser play, web clients and portals. |
| Welcoming community | A welcoming, supportive, collaborative social fabric. |

### +Concern codes

| Code | Definition |
|---|---|
| Aging playerbase | The graying of the playerbase; not enough young people coming up. |
| AI concerns | AI, LLMs, or generated “slop” named as the problem: soulless content, over-dependence, replacing humans. |
| AI sentiment | Worry about the anti-AI backlash itself splitting the community (3 uses). |
| Burnout | Developers, staff, or players burning out or losing steam. |
| Community problems | Structural community problems: collective negativity, cliquishness, lack of mutual support. |
| Concentration | Players consolidating into a few dominant games, crowding out smaller ones. |
| Dead games | Games that are already dead or empty. |
| Decline in quality | Poor or substandard output: low-quality games, buggy messes. |
| Fragmentation | A small population spread too thin across games, platforms, and projects. |
| Games dying | Games in the process of closing. |
| Gatekeeping | The established in-group excluding newcomers or non-conformers. |
| High barriers | High barriers to entry: hard to install, learn, or get started. |
| Lack of games | Too few games being made or available. |
| Lack of players | A current shortage of players, including newcomers, without a trend claim. |
| Loss of creativity | Erosion of human creativity and artistry, usually via AI substitution or low effort. |
| Loss of players | A downward trend in the playerbase: declining, dwindling, shrinking. |
| Low effort | A consumer-only mindset: waiting to be entertained instead of contributing. |
| Monetization | Commercialization concerns: cash grabs, pay-to-win. |
| Outside headwinds | Outside headwinds: real life, competing media, societal shifts. |
| Player expectations | Shifting audience expectations and game or RP conventions and policies. |
| Poor reach | Lack of visibility, discoverability, marketing, or recruitment. |
| Quality-of-life gaps | Lack of quality-of-life; poor playability. |
| Risk of losing history | Risk of losing games, code, or history. |
| Staff issues | Problems with how games are run: corruption, abusive admins, heavy-handed control. |
| Stagnation | Failure to evolve: clinging to old tech, refusal to change, sameness. |
| Too solo-focused | Drift toward solo play at the expense of the multiplayer aspect. |
| Toxicity | Interpersonal bad behavior: harassment, drama, hostility, trolls. |
| Waning interest | Waning or lacking interest and enthusiasm. |

### Appendix III: Full theme counts

The thematic analysis lists only the ten most-cited themes on each side. For those who are curious, this appendix provides the full picture.

The tables below list every theme with its exact count. Percentages are the share of the 197 people who wrote a free-text answer, and because one response can raise several themes, they add up to more than 100%. Each code is defined in [Appendix II](https://writing-games.org/?p=22715&preview=true#appendix-coding-rubric).

#### All concern themes

| Code | Respondents |
|---|---|
| *Loss of players* | 36 (18.3%) |
| *AI concerns* | 33 (16.8%) |
| *Lack of players* | 30 (15.2%) |
| *Stagnation* | 30 (15.2%) |
| *Player expectations* | 23 (11.7%) |
| *Toxicity* | 20 (10.2%) |
| *Poor reach* | 20 (10.2%) |
| *Community problems* | 15 (7.6%) |
| *Aging playerbase* | 15 (7.6%) |
| *Fragmentation* | 13 (6.6%) |
| *Decline in quality* | 13 (6.6%) |
| *Outside headwinds* | 10 (5.1%) |
| *Gatekeeping* | 10 (5.1%) |
| *Loss of creativity* | 10 (5.1%) |
| *Staff issues* | 9 (4.6%) |
| *Burnout* | 7 (3.6%) |
| *Risk of losing history* | 6 (3.0%) |
| *High barriers* | 6 (3.0%) |
| *Games dying* | 5 (2.5%) |
| *Waning interest* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Concentration* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Dead games* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Lack of games* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *AI sentiment* | 3 (1.5%) |
| *Too solo-focused* | 3 (1.5%) |
| *Low effort* | 3 (1.5%) |
| *Monetization* | 3 (1.5%) |
| *Quality-of-life gaps* | 2 (1.0%) |

Table 18. Every concern theme, by the number of respondents who raised it (out of the 197 who wrote a free-text answer).A note about the *Lack of players* and *Loss of players* codes:

While both themes encapsulate a similar worry, there’s a reason I decided to code them separately: they describe slightly different problems with potentially different solutions – both for the hobby and for individual games.

For example:

- If a *lack* of players is the bigger problem, then a solution might be to generate more awareness and put in more effort to recruit.
- If a *loss* of players is the bigger problem, then a solution might be to pay more [attention to retention](https://writing-games.org/improving-player-retention-text-games/) or on how to get players to return.

I opted to do the games codes separately for similar reasons. Some codes capture status, some capture directionality or trend. Ultimately, when I ran the analyses, I analyzed the codes separately and as buckets, so nothing was lost in doing it this way.

#### All positive themes

| Code | Respondents |
|---|---|
| *Innovation* | 30 (15.2%) |
| *Welcoming community* | 29 (14.7%) |
| *Activity* | 28 (14.2%) |
| *New players* | 22 (11.2%) |
| *Renewed interest* | 22 (11.2%) |
| *AI benefits* | 17 (8.6%) |
| *Lower barriers* | 16 (8.1%) |
| *New games* | 15 (7.6%) |
| *Improving norms* | 15 (7.6%) |
| *Persistence* | 12 (6.1%) |
| *Accessibility gains* | 11 (5.6%) |
| *Modernization* | 10 (5.1%) |
| *MU\* clients* | 9 (4.6%) |
| *Technology* | 9 (4.6%) |
| *Less toxicity* | 9 (4.6%) |
| *Growing reach* | 8 (4.1%) |
| *Existing players* | 7 (3.6%) |
| *Web improvements* | 7 (3.6%) |
| *Mobile improvements* | 6 (3.0%) |
| *Quality-of-life gains* | 5 (2.5%) |
| *Creative output* | 5 (2.5%) |
| *Standards* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Multigenerational* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Outside tailwinds* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Uniqueness* | 4 (2.0%) |
| *Preservation efforts* | 3 (1.5%) |
| *Integration* | 3 (1.5%) |

Table 19. Every positive theme, by the number of respondents who raised it (out of the 197 who wrote a free-text answer).