View Single Post
Old 06-20-2014, 01:03 PM   #1
MightyK
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11
MightyK is on a distinguished road
Veteran Player Placating vs. Asset Utilization

This thread's longform title might be: Veteran Player Placating vs. Asset Utilization During Player Population Decline.

I've thought about this idea for a long while in my years as a player and a staffer, and have just now been able to put it into finer terms. First, I will start by describing some general norms for muds and how they might relate to this discussion.

Most established MUDs with dedicated players form an 'elite' cadre of veteran players, a hardcore and dedicated subset of the MUD's population who understand the game mechanics well enough to excel. There is usually a growing gap between the 'rewards' these players reap and that of the new players.

Most 'elite' populations involve social cliques and circles, where there is a hierarchy or competing hierarchies. These cliques rarely stay within the bounds of IC interaction, which can create problems when trying to regulate the game, especially in regards to leadership positions and fairness. A common instance of an 'elite' hierarchy phenomenon I've seen on three different mud's involves what I call a golden ladder complex, which I've described in a previous thread.



A MUD's staff usually listens to their established and 'most elite' players. This is only natural. But is it wise?

When a MUD's population starts to decline, it is usually the 'elite' population that is the last to leave. It makes sense, because they often have the most time and effort invested into their characters, so have the most to lose by leaving. I've witnessed MUDs today that, in order to placate this dwindling group of 'elites', have given into their demands or suggestions (that usually come with an apocalyptic ultimatum by these 'elites') no matter how ridiculous or extreme, including deleting many Guilds/Clans/Groups arbitrarily, eliminating RP requirements, destroying the theme of the mud, eliminating hundreds of rooms for nonsensical 'belt tightening', and various other fixes that have done nothing but drive the MUDs in question into further decline. Many of these changes have alienated the few 'non-elite' players who remained.

My question is, at what point does placating the dwindling 'elites' becomes less valuable than the actual assets of the MUD? At what point does a MUD's staff decide that they would rather go in a completely different direction -- even if that means losing these veteran players? It seems that MUD's are often incorrectly valued. A game with an immense room count, an enriched world, unique environments and mobs is a great asset, one that might -- by itself -- outweigh the headcount of entrenched veterans.

A related idea is that perhaps the problem doesn't exist with the MUD, but with the jaded attitude of these veteran players.

There is, in my view, a point where the MUD staff has to look at the decline clinically. If they've been listening to an 'elite' cadre the entire time, and the MUD has continued to suffer as a result, then they aren't having the desired effect. There needs to be option to dramatically change things, fundamental things, regardless of what the hardcore players wish.

At some point in population decline, the MUD itself is more valuable than the remaining players.
MightyK is offline   Reply With Quote