I was just thinking it would be helpful if there was some spot on each Mud's "Info" page that tells us whether they are a PAY ONLY mud, or whether they are FREE.

And in addition to that, HOW MUCH it costs to play the mud.

It would be helpful for players that have NO Money to spend to know right away when they look at the mud info page that this mud requires you spending some cash. That way, they don't need to go any further.

And also, I guess, a searchable query to show FREE MUDS versus PAY MUDs.

Hoop

Eh. Please add $ on at least the rankings page.

$ defining a MUD that "accepts donations in trade for stuff" or a MUD that is literally pay to play, that is.

-D

This already exists. Go to the "Features" box. Most, if not all, pay to play MUDs list themselves as such here.

You can do this if you use the site's advanced search feature.

I'd go so far as to suggest an icon on the top level page.  I can't think of a faster turnoff for me than having to pay, or playing on a game where RL money buys IC incentives.  There's too many high-quality free games out there to bother with that, IMHO.

In most cases, "pay for incentives" ends up being de facto pay-to-play, so I agree they should share the "$" symbol.  Ditto for places that only let you play to a certain level, enter certain areas, etc. if you fork over cash.

I have no problem with donations, so long as they are optional and don't influence the game's workings.

NO! I strongly disagree. We do not segregate other games for any other factors such as server speed or location!

Pay-to-play is a MUCH bigger factor than location or server speed, or anything else honestly for that matter, except maybe codebase. I'm all for something going on the ranking list as well as something easily readable in the mud info section.

And honestly, as for the top level page, I'm thinking that it will be a moot point soon anyways as pay muds, spinoffs of pay muds, and sister sites of pay muds will soon dominate the top 10, and probably top 20, and you can just go to pages 2-5 for the non-pay muds...

Sad huh?

Ummm, is this intended to imply all pay-to-play games that make it into the top 20 are doing something inherently unethical to get there? Because the other way to read your post would be to think you're saying pay-to-play muds are inherently better, and thus have more players, and thus are getting more votes.

Both are wrong.

Well since the subtopic of "pay to play" has come up in other threads how about this - Have 2 seperate Top 100 lists. One for those that for whatever reason (other than donations) you have to pay to play and the other for "free" MU*s, etc ?
As for the idea of segregation, bah! TMS has subtly done it since it's creation because if it never did it then there would be no "RP Enforced, Restricted PK. Extended Classes, etc" descriptions, so the post about segregating MUDs and future posts are really moot.
If there were 2 seperate lists, then MUDs like Fuedal Realms can be # 1 in the Free lists and whatever can be #1 in the PtP lists. That way there's MORE room for newer MUDs to get on the lists instead of seeing the TMS version of NASCAR on the top 10 (NASCAR = Same 10 rednecks always win, TMS - Same 10 PtP MUDs are on top). With two lists you can actually double the listings, double the (possible) membership (because to vote you have to be registered right? And if your MUD is here, you'd want your players to be registered so they can vote for your MUD right?). With a larger registration base, word would get out..people would come here first over TMC and who knows? Maybe a mention of TMS on Extended Play (on TechTV) or in The MUD Companion or other gaming rags.
Think about it...it could be beneficial.

Advertisement.

Simple as that, the main reason most p2p muds are bigger is because they can afford full sized advertisements in magazines dealing with RPGs such as Inquest and whatnot. And, together with the initial large playerbase comes the advertisement by players trying to bring other people in as well.

If free (as in free beer) muds could put up huge advertisement without putting a triple mortage on the server, would they have more success as well? It's marketing people. The p2p muds simply have the ability of throwing vast ammounts of money at a problem until it get's solved or solves itself, including the aquisition of fresh and new players. Free muds are locked in a tight battle for every player they can get. How many absolutely NEW free mudders are there every month? And I mean people absolutely new to mudding, not old timers... Sadly few in the free (beer) community, but allot in the p2p community.

Back on track, I have to abstain about commenting about marking p2p muds. One side tells me to agree to differentiate said muds from the rest, but I also realize that this ranking is about MUDs. If it is a MU*/MOO/blah, then there should be no difference between p2p and free. Tough call... Really tough call.

I don't know about the others, but we don't advertise in any magazines and hardly on the web anymore at all.

I hadn't heard of Inquest before, but I'll definitely look into it.

I'm suprised this topic wasn't generated as a poll, given the fact it has been brought up in other boards and lended itself to pages of discussion. Though I'm sure listing $ on front would win by a landslide.

My personal opinion (everyone's got 'em, no?) is that there is as little need to segreate pay sites on the main page by putting a $ as there is to segregate them by their codebase on the main page. The main pages list, the Info button defines.

American society being as spoonfed as it is, break the chain - if a MU* looks neat on the top 20 page DO SOME RESEARCH. Take an extra minute- click the Info button, check out the MUD's web site. Honestly, unless you're just into randomly trying MU*s I find it hard to understand why you'd look for a new home without doing some research. Pulling up a MU*s web site and seeing the button that says "Free Trial Membership" probably takes a shorter time to research than going through a properly offered Character Generation system and discovering once you've logged on.

Perhaps a separate field in the Mud Info area isn't a bad idea, listing a few options a MU* can define itself to choose from (see other threads for people's concepts on that). This way the player loses as much time when researching a MU* as if they checked out the Info and went "Yuck, they didn't describe themselves as a WoT-themed MUD on the front page!" I think Ing pointed out many p4p do this in Features any way, but if it will help soothe the rest of the battered and bruised community... why not?

Like I said, this is just an opinion. *shrugs* Opinions are like... y'know the phrase. Everyone's got 'em and no one wants to hear anyone else's. *wink*

Hamm, you're fired.

*wink*

[Editted, added past this point]

Actually, bringing up the making profit off of free advertisement is a valid point. The frame shop I work at has a "professional artist" working there that often works on her own work for resale later. This does irk me.

While I'm still of my earlier opinion, I would think those promoting a p4p MU* would offer some compensation to a site offering "free" advertisements by perhaps purchasing a banner or something.

God bless commercialism.

Of course, that might not be a good idea because then we'd probably have debates on "Oh, look at the p4p's buying up all the advertisement space... blah blah blah" or people looking at donations as a form of seeking favoritism. Ah, there is no winning, is there?

*finishes up*

Well...for what it's worth, we're working on ads. I'm definitely of a mind that if were sucking up any of Synozeer's bandwidth, I want to contribute.

But yes, I agree, I'm a little worried of the fallout when our banners hit the rotation. :\

For my part, I don't mind indicating that GS3 is a pay to play MUD.

There's some suggestion that Simutronics' products are doing a disservice to the free MUDs by being here. I'd like to point out that since we joined this site, most of our users who have been voting have also taken the opportunity to investigate your games.

This site is about sharing information about the available text-based games for the sake of the community of people interested in such. We're more than willing to let our thousands of users check out your games. Surely you can see the advantages of such an arrangement.

Melissa Meyer
GemStone III

Thanks Melissa. I know that I had never thought of reverse advertising, and I appreciate your bringing it to our attention.

I would like to clarify that I am in no way bashing Simutronics and their family of pay to play muds that are sweeping the polls, but stating (rather jokingly) that ranks 1-20 will be mostly Simutronics games, then 21+ will be everybody else. In fact if I _was_ bashing, then very soon TG_Nek would have my hide for a welcome mat.

*shouts loudly "tarmun guydin rooools!" and then falls into a drunken stupor*

I also think that there is really no need to put up dollar signs next to a MUD that is listed on this site. This is an open site to take a look at what people think is the best MUD in their own eyes. The cost, or lack of cost, has no real effect on what peoples opinion is on the game.

If you are not willing to pay you can very easily just check out the next MUD listed. And its not as if the pay to play MUDs are tricking people into thinking it's a free game. Its very obvious that you have to pay when visiting the game's site or even by reading the information on each individual MUD provided here.

Yes, people are beginning to see that the p2p MUDs do have more people. That has nothing at all do to with the price of the MUD itself. If you don't think the game is worth the money, you probably wouldn't pay for it at all. Looking at it from that perspective, the people who have been paying p2p MUDs that do not think it's worth the cost are given direct links to this site from the voting links located on the pages for the games themselves. That in the end could mean free MUDs end up getting more players from those people who have decided it's not worth it to pay for what brings them enjoyment or because they simply cannot afford it any longer.

~Nik

There's only one thing I take issue with regarding these high-volume games (specifically Simutronics).

There's DragonRealms
there's DragonRealms: The Fallen
and there's DragonRealms Platinum, which is independant of the original.

Then there's GemstoneIII and GemstoneIII Platinum, with The Fallen supposedly on its way eventually.

That's two games taking up to 6 different slots on the top list.

I consider that rather unfair, because Simu knows that perhaps one other company's game can possibly compete with Simu in playerbase.

I think Simu should place DragonRealms as a single offering on TMS, and GemStoneIII as a single offering on TMS, and the "info" button can explain the different versions of each. The same goes for Inferno, which has just recently split into Inferno: Classic and Inferno:Firestorm.