[the_logos]

Check out the September issue of CWG. There's a half page article about Achaea in there. Text hasn't been completely forgotten by mainstream games media!

--matt

[Myrd]

Or at least Achaea hasn't been completely forgotten by mainstream games media. Not to bash Achaea or anything, but it seems all recent mainstream publicity has been focusing on Achaea. Besides Medievia's $16000 PC Gamer 1page advertisement a while back, and all of Achaea's publicity, I haven't heard any other MUDs mentioned anywhere in the mainstream. Is it just a case of other MUD owners not trying as hard as Achaea to get their PR out, or is it some other parts of the equation?

[Kenjar]

Originally Posted by (Myrd @ July 26 2004,17:28) Or at least Achaea hasn't been completely forgotten by mainstream games media. Not to bash Achaea or anything, but it seems all recent mainstream publicity has been focusing on Achaea. Besides Medievia's $16000 PC Gamer 1page advertisement a while back, and all of Achaea's publicity, I haven't heard any other MUDs mentioned anywhere in the mainstream. Is it just a case of other MUD owners not trying as hard as Achaea to get their PR out, or is it some other parts of the equation?

Maybe because Achaea is the biggest and most popular MUD out there that is (Mostly) free to play, and still manages to have a good level of Roleplaying? And you answered the question about advertising yourself- they have the money, small muds don't.

[the_logos]

Well, honestly, no, I don't think either of those has anything to do with it. Remember we're talking about PR here, not advertising.

It boils down to a few factors.

1. Mainstream games media (after all, Computer Gaming World is hardly mainstream media generally, just mainstream games media) isn't too keen on covering hobby projects, which make up 98-99% of text muds.

2. Most text mud admins devote no time whatsoever to PR. Why should they? If you're doing something for a hobby, does it really matter? The attention might be nice but that's all that's really driving you in that situation, unless you're angling to parlay your mud into a job in the games industry.

3. Most text muds don't really do anything worth being covered by the mainstream games media. What this type of media reporter wants to see are things that will make sense and be of interest to his readers (ie people who don't play text muds). This definitely does not include roleplaying, nor does it include having a new fantasy race or cool monster bashing, etc. Gleam got us a lot of attention because drug use is a familiar, controversial subject to people generally, whether they play text muds or not.

--matt

[bbg]

Plus, you must remember that this is **Matt's** mud and Matt is the only one who has ever managed to run a mud as a business (or so it would seem from all the confidence eminating from every single word he ever says...)
How annoying that arrogance is becomming!

[Hephos]

Originally Posted by Plus, you must remember that this is **Matt's** mud and Matt is the only one who has ever managed to run a mud as a business (or so it would seem from all the confidence eminating from every single word he ever says...) How annoying that arrogance is becomming!

Actually i think he use to mention gemstone and all the other more profiting muds runned as business... So its not like he's saying achaea is the only mud managed to make a profit.

[Harker]

Originally Posted by (bbg @ July 27 2004,06:06) How annoying that arrogance is becomming!

Arrogance backed up by demonstrable gameplay. I started on Achaea two years ago, from an ad on PVP Online. Funny, that. Battle.net was down, and I thought I could pass an hour or two in this odd little text game.

I no longer have Diablo 2 installed on my computer. Advertising pays! Matt and the team at IRE have a good product. It doesn't take much to sell a good one.

[bbg]

That Achaea is a brilliant mud I don't doubt for a moment - it is one of the best that I have ever played. All I am saying is that Matt's blowing his own horn is going to make some people deaf! It is just becoming boring and a bit much and if you look at many of his posts about himself and the company and the way he often speak to newbies and newcommers it just radiats arrogance which is most of the time uncalled for. Like you said - a good product sells itself hey!
But anyway - I don't suppose this is the place to moan about people and to get personal (I know I started it)... If there is any other place where I can go to incriminate him, please let me know...

[dragon master]

Maybe it's because Achea can afford to advertise itself because it is a pay to play mud? There are many much better muds that are free to play but because they are free, they don't have the money to do things like this. It seems pretty simple, really.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Hephos @ July 27 2004,07:24) Originally Posted by Plus, you must remember that this is **Matt's** mud and Matt is the only one who has ever managed to run a mud as a business (or so it would seem from all the confidence eminating from every single word he ever says...) How annoying that arrogance is becomming! Actually i think he use to mention gemstone and all the other more profiting muds runned as business... So its not like he's saying achaea is the only mud managed to make a profit.

Yep. Simutronics is better than we are at doing commercial muds. There's no arguing with the bottom line. Medievia also seems to be doing nicely, as does Threshold. Not sure how Eternal City is doing these days but they had a fair few players once.

--matt

[the_logos]

5-->

Originally Posted by (bbg @ July 27 2004,09[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]5)]All I am saying is that Matt's blowing his own horn is going to make some people deaf!  It is just becoming boring and a bit much and if you look at many of his posts about himself and the company and the way he often speak to newbies and newcommers it just radiats arrogance which is most of the time uncalled for.  Like you said - a good product sells itself hey!

Ahh, you have to love Topmudsites and the inability of many posters to refrain from unprovoked ad hominem attacks.

Incidentally, I appreciate you keeping this topic on the Recent Discussions list. Thanks.
--matt

[Valg]

In related news, McDonald's is profitable, popular, and gets a lot of media attention.

It's not where I want my dinner prepared, but there's a place for it.

[bbg]

Originally Posted by Ahh, you have to love Topmudsites and the inability of many posters to refrain from unprovoked ad hominem attacks. Incidentally, I appreciate you keeping this topic on the Recent Discussions list. Thanks.

Ah heck - I must admit the truth about the mud that I have enjoyed more than any other one I have ever played, and will do my best to promote it!
( Where's that money you promised me?  The transfer hasn't come through to my bank account as of yet? )

[the_logos]

1-->

Originally Posted by (Valg @ July 27 2004,14[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]1)]In related news, McDonald's is profitable, popular, and gets a lot of media attention. It's not where I want my dinner prepared, but there's a place for it.

Man I'd love to be McDonalds.  However, Everquest and company have that angle covered in muds.

We'll stick with doing what we're good at though: boutique games catering to a niche audience. Of course, that describes all text muds. *shrug*

--matt

[Wenlin]

I've, uh, got a September issue of CGW, and I can't even find the article. Anyone know what page it's on?

Edit: Never mind, between page 28 and 29.

[Beren]

Don't understand why everyone is complaining about
the success of Achaea et al. Good for them.

They are businessmen and part of being a business is
marketing and promotion and they seem to being a good job at that.

Also remember that when a certain brand is advertised (Achaea)
the whole product (text MU*s) is advertised as well.
So I don't mind them spending money/time to advertise Achaea to people that have never heard of text MU*s.
Maybe if we are doing a good job in  our MUDs some people
will end up in our MUd.

Now if you don't want to help them do that stop replying to the
'pat myself at the back' posts that keeps them in the recent discussions list  .
I will shut up as well now

[vitae]

That's funny, I thought Achaea was a free-to-play.
I mean, i tried it, didn't like it in the least, and didn't stay, but at least I didn't see anything about needing to pay.
I am sure that it's good as far as many others are concerned since it is #2 ranked and at times #1, but I sure as #### wouldn't play any place that was pay-to-pay.

[Treestump]

Originally Posted by (Beren @ July 28 2004,06:51) Don't understand why everyone is complaining about the success of Achaea

It's called jealousy.

[Jazuela]

Maybe Logos can be annoying with his very loud pats on his own back. Maybe not. Doesn't bother me, personally, but I can see how it would annoy others.

The fact of the matter is though, that text games are a very narrow niche in the gaming community. We're not a dying breed by any stretch of the imagination, but we are - an odd duck when it comes to the world of "games."

There are people out there in the "rest of the world" who don't know that text games exist. Some of those people don't care. Some don't know that the opportunity to care exists, but would care if it was pointed out to them.

Achaea's good fortune and money spent on promotions and efforts in public relations gets the word out to the "might play if I knew it existed" population that these games exist.

Sure, it draws attention to their game - and well it should! But not everyone who "might play if I knew it existed" will like that particular game after giving it a try. And some of THOSE people will think - hm. This game exists, and oh what's that "VOTE" button on their website? And click just to see what else is out there. And then - THEN! Another game gets a visitor from someone who "might play if I knew it existed."

One successful commercial game drawing attention to the text-game community can only be a GOOD thing, and so I applaud the efforts of anyone who is willing to go to bat for the genre in such a public way, and I feel they deserve to pat themselves on the back and tell everyone "Hey lookie what I did!"

[Brody]

I agree with Jazuela. Whether the_logos gets on your nerves or not, it's fantastic that his games get some print in magazines that normally only care about graphical MMORPGs or standard PC fare.

I've been lucky enough myself to have my games featured in a Tampa Tribune article - major mainstream media - but I don't think that's nearly as effective as the exposure Achaea got with CGW.

The beauty of Achaea's exposure, whether you like the_logos or not, is that it's good news for all text game operators. In our character creation process on the JTS games, we ask where our players come from and what experience they've had. I've lost count of how many newbies we've received by way of Achaea, Imperian, Aetolia and The Eternal City - commercial, well-publicized games.

Good publicity for Iron Realms, Skotos and other commercial MU* projects amounts to good publicity for everybody in the MU* community. Celebrate it.

[Avasyu]

Originally Posted by I've lost count of how many newbies we've received by way of Achaea, Imperian, Aetolia and The Eternal City - commercial, well-publicized games

Woot! Someone mentioned Imperian! We Rock!

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Avasyu @ July 28 2004,14:33) Originally Posted by I've lost count of how many newbies we've received by way of Achaea, Imperian, Aetolia and The Eternal City - commercial, well-publicized games Woot! Someone mentioned Imperian! We Rock!

No you don't. You suck.

And Brody: Stop stealing our players, you bastard!

--matt

[Reyas]

Originally Posted by (vitae @ July 28 2004,10:31) That's funny, I thought Achaea was a free-to-play.

You thought correctly.

[vitae]

Originally Posted by (Reyas @ July 28 2004,22:46) Originally Posted by vitae,July 28 2004,10:31 That's funny, I thought Achaea was a free-to-play. You thought correctly.

Then why was it said a few times that it's pay-to-play?

[Cyre]

Originally Posted by (vitae @ July 28 2004,23:12) Then why was it said a few times that it's pay-to-play?

Because people are ignorant and don't take the time to analyze business models beyond what random forum browsers claim as fact, unsupported as it may be. The IRE philosophy has been well explained in numerous posts in this forum as well as other places over the years, so there's certainly no deficit of material from which people could be enlightened, given even a minimal amount of effort.

Iron Realms worlds are free to play. That being said, they are a business, and their model allows for players to "purchase virtual goods and services that assist the player in the game." The benefits and downfalls of this type of model have been debated many times, though I suspect not nearly as often as Matt has been maligned due purely to a stance of self-imposed ignorance. Regardless of what any of these individuals say, the company has obviously been a success, far more so I would conjecture than Matt originally foresaw, and that alone speaks volumes for the competence of the business model and, subsequently, the level of contentment within the playerbases of all three Iron Realms worlds.

[Reyas]

Originally Posted by (vitae @ July 28 2004,23:12) Then why was it said a few times that it's pay-to-play?

Some people are stupid, and/or have an axe to grind, so spread FUD. Notice that neither Achaea nor IRE says it is pay to play. Anyone else is pretty much by definition not the best source.

[Jazuela]

Without all the bandwagon diatribe, I give you a translation on the pay-to-play vs. free:

Achaea is free to play, BUT you have an option of buying various perks if you choose to do so. You are not obligated to buy, you are not obligated to pay, you can play free indefinitely to your heart's content, and from what I understand, many people do exactly that.

And so - it is not pay-to-play, because playing is absolutely free of charge. It is "pay-for-perks" which is not a requirement to the end user.

[Estarra]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ July 29 2004,07:54) And so - it is not pay-to-play, because playing is absolutely free of charge. It is "pay-for-perks" which is not a requirement to the end user.

I always thought "pay-to-play" was a misnomer for this type of business model. I rather like "pay-for-perks"--wonder if it will catch on?

[vitae]

Ah, now that makes sense.
It's like Race War Kingdom then.
U can play, but if ya want some of the uber stuff ya gotta pay for them.
Now I got it :-)

[Cyre]

Originally Posted by (vitae @ July 29 2004,12:30) Ah, now that makes sense. It's like Race War Kingdom then. U can play, but if ya want some of the uber stuff ya gotta pay for them. Now I got it :-)

Beyond just the possibility of getting "uber stuff", the "perks" as they have been so deemed include the ability of rapid development, particularly in the area of what skills are available to your character. It's possible through various mechanisms to increase your skill levels within the game at whatever pace you desire, but it is undeniable that the fastest way to develop one's skills to their highest level is to purchase said perks.

This of course raises the idea of Time as a commodity in and of itself. You are paying not just for the capacity to gain things that others don't have access to, but you also pay for the opportunity to gain things that others DO have access to, but with far less of your own Time spent working towards such.