Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
Go Back   Top Mud Sites Forum > MUD Players and General Discussion > Tavern of the Blue Hand
Click here to Register

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-14-2006, 07:13 PM   #21
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,303
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by
3) Mandatory Money Donations by some players to cover hosting costs.
4) Requirement to buy products from associates to cover hosting costs.

Add those to the list and it might display a true picture of what is the actual necesity of RL money to play the game.

Carrion Fields would check both, then many MUDs would have to check the 3rd (at least all of those that will appear on the first couple of pages and have not checked the previous two)
And what about something like,
5) Optional payments may alter experience closely tied to the game (and may actually influence the game itself that way).

So, for instance, Carrion Fields would check that one, as they sell tributes to in-game dead characters on their forums.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 07:15 PM   #22
malaclypse
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca
Posts: 68
malaclypse is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Drealoth @ Feb. 14 2006,16:58)
I don't see why you all have such a big problem with the IRE games.

Each of their games' websites have information about the credits system, and when playing the games as soon as you're finished the newbie quest you're told about the credits. As I'm sure the_logos will attest, IRE's business model relies on people finding out that one can spend money on their game.
This really sums it all up. The new standards are being framed as something that will be helpful to players, but the ones I see consistently starting arguments about the meanings of "free" and "pay to play" are various mud administrators. I don't recall any posts from an upset newbie who was misled into playing a game under false pretense.

This is clearly directed against a minority of muds, all of which seem to be very popular. I'm not going to claim to know the intentions behind the proposed search engine changes, but its hard to not see it as plain jealousy.

- Ryan
malaclypse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 07:22 PM   #23
Traveler
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 50
Traveler is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
This is clearly directed against a minority of muds, all of which seem to be very popular. I'm not going to claim to know the intentions behind the proposed search engine changes, but its hard to not see it as plain jealousy.
I'm not going to claim to know your reasoning for wanting to limit the spread of information to the MUD community and player base, but its hard not to see as plain bias. After all you did buy the rights to use rapture from IRE and your forums state you intend to use a pay for perk model. It is just not good business practice to give a potential customer as much information as possible that might hurt sales.
Traveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 07:50 PM   #24
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,303
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Traveler @ Feb. 14 2006,20:22)
I'm not going to claim to know your reasoning for wanting to limit the spread of information to the MUD community and player base, but its hard not to see as plain bias. After all you did buy the rights to use rapture from IRE and your forums state you intend to use a pay for perk model. It is just not good business practice to give a potential customer as much information as possible that might hurt sales.
You might ask the same thing about "professional" vs. "hobbyist." Is there a desire to hide that information on the part of hobbyists? Yes, and no. It's a desire not to pose a false dichotomy because of previous expectations by the player. Valg is, for instance, clearly a skilled administrator. Text MUDs are too difficult to recruit players for for someone incompetent to build a decent sized playerbase. But when you put the words 'professional' and 'hobbyist' side by side, one looks bad and one looks better, just like when you selectively present other types of information.

I've stated, for instance, over and over and over, that I have no problem with full disclosure of revenue models relating to the MUDs, though I believe that includes things like a MUD paying for its server bills by charging players for things whether in game or out of game.

And I mean, we have entire web pages devoted to paying real money, linked from the front page of all of our games' websites. New characters are automatically told about credits after they're out of the newbie intro or almost right away if they choose not to do the newbie intro. If we were interested in hiding information, why the heck would we do any of that?

Why would I post in the forums on TMS saying, "We are commercial. You can buy credits from us" if we were interested in hiding information? Look, I said it again!

Anyway, Kavir is probably right insofar as the easiest and fairest way to do this is just to remove the option to select "pay for play" and make no comment about business model. I'm ok with that or truly full disclosure about revenue models.
--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 07:54 PM   #25
malaclypse
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Santa Cruz, Ca
Posts: 68
malaclypse is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I'm not going to claim to know your reasoning for wanting to limit the spread of information to the MUD community and player base, but its hard not to see as plain bias. After all you did buy the rights to use rapture from IRE and your forums state you intend to use a pay for perk model. It is just not good business practice to give a potential customer as much information as possible that might hurt sales.
I guess you missed the latter half of Draeloth's post. In it he correctly states that the business model I intend to use (every business model, for that matter) relies on people knowing that it exists. I wasn't going to post off-topic and talk about how my project is related, but thanks for turning the spotlight.

- Ryan
malaclypse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 08:31 PM   #26
Protoss
New Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 18
Protoss is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Valg @ Feb. 14 2006,13:54)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Protoss @ Feb. 14 2006,13:37)
I have a problem with the first check box (Optional payments can influence gameplay). This seems to be more of a value judgement than hard facts, therefore making it ambiguous. How do you exactly define influencing the gameplay? No one would check this box either, it's confusing unless some more specific wording is added.
Aside from the choice of verb (alter?), I guess I don't find it unclear.  What type of game couldn't make a decision there?

As far as "No one would check this box"... I think IRE would, Aardwolf would, Threshold would, Materia Magica would, Medievia would... that list goes on.  the_logos points out that by making these sorts of payments, one can accelerate one's development within the game, which is appealing to some players.  Other people have voiced a dislike for it, because it introduces an OOC variable into an IC equation.  The checkbox would just let people know in advance which kind of game it is.

It's clear from the language ("optional", "can") that paying is voluntary, and that you get something for it.  I don't think any of the games in question would dispute that.  If they would, I encourage them to speak up and explain why, of course.
I guess I could stir up a little debate about your wording there. For instance, does paying the MUD $20 for your own unique clothing (non-armor) necessarily influence the game play? It's something you wear. Does paying the MUD a few dollars to have your own unique weapon necessarily influence gameplay when more powerful weapons can exist in the game?

I liked your other three suggestions. They would be more feasible. But then again is it necessary? No, I think the consumer can find out that information on his/her own.
Protoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 10:29 PM   #27
Jazuela
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 846
Jazuela will become famous soon enoughJazuela will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Spoke @ Feb. 14 2006,20:10)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ Feb. 14 2006,17:49)
1) Payment optional for some or all game benefits.
2) Payment required for some or all game benefits.
3) Mandatory Money Donations by some players to cover hosting costs.
4) Requirement to buy products from associates to cover hosting costs.

Add those to the list and it might display a true picture of what is the actual necesity of RL money to play the game.

Carrion Fields would check both, then many MUDs would have to check the 3rd (at least all of those that will appear on the first couple of pages and have not checked the previous two)
If payment is mandatory then it isn't a donation, no matter what it's supposed to cover. If you cannot play the game without "offering a donation" then it is "Payment required for some or all game benefits" and that is covered by option #2 in my proposal.

If you are required to buy items (such as t-shirts) to cover the server cost, and if it's discovered you haven't bought any and are then locked out of the game as a result, it is also covered by option #2 - payment required for some or all game benefits.

I'll repeat, because apparently it wasn't as simplistic as I thought it was:

If you are required to give any of your money to support the game, in any way, shape or form, and are not allowed to play the game without giving up that money, then it is "payment required." Again - if it's required, it isn't a donation. Again - if you cannot play without the money, then it doesn't matter what the admin claims the money is covering. You are receiving a game benefit for the money - access to the game once your payment is acknowledged.

I thought that was pretty clear. I mean, even Valq got it, and you all KNOW how obtuse he is
Jazuela is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2006, 11:18 PM   #28
The_Disciple
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 113
The_Disciple is on a distinguished road
What it really amounts to is that everyone in this thread "gets it." Some people are just choosing to pretend that they don't get it, or that they do get it but "it" doesn't matter.

It's all very farcical, childish, and silly. God forbid people argue in an honest and non-theatrically-faux-ignorant way against something.
The_Disciple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 12:54 AM   #29
Drealoth
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Japan
Posts: 74
Drealoth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Drealoth
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ Feb. 15 2006,08:29)
If you are required to give any of your money to support the game, in any way, shape or form, and are not allowed to play the game without giving up that money, then it is "payment required." Again - if it's required, it isn't a donation. Again - if you cannot play without the money, then it doesn't matter what the admin claims the money is covering. You are receiving a game benefit for the money - access to the game once your payment is acknowledged.
The problem here is that every MUD involving money has their own degree of requiredness.

Aardwolf gives donating players a special amulet with some minor stat boosts, although this is more in recognition than the player 'buying' the amulet. For most people, the donation is done to donate, not for this amulet. Is that pay to play?

With IRE paying money is optional, but without it it would be incredibly difficult for one to become successful in PvP combat (although one can still have a great time in the game without paying a cent).

Threshold charges $50 to play, and then you can play forever.

MUD2 costs about $10/month to play.

The list goes on. Every MUD would require their own category.

If anything was to be changed I think that there should simply be a button that is '100% Free' for MUDs to click if real money has absolutely no effect on the game, and another which is 'Recurring fee to play' for muds such as MUD2 where you have to pay per month/hour/week/whatever. Everything inbetween could leave it blank and as such, nothing would show up in that field (such as if you don't check the 'support ansi box' it doesn't say 'Doesn't support ansi' ). Even in this case though, there would be problems - I know that if someone offered me 10000 yen for a cool item in my game I'd definitely consider taking the offer, even if before I'd never offered anything for players.
Drealoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 05:14 AM   #30
Sinuhe
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 55
Sinuhe is on a distinguished road
the-logos wrote:

Posted: Feb. 14 2006,14:48
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I wouldn't check it because I don't care for the wording and because I dislike the motives behind it. I'd imagine lots of people would feel the same way about checkboxes for "mud administration headed by amateur mud developers" and "mud administration headed by professional mud developers."
Posted: Feb. 14 2006,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quote (Valg @ Feb. 14 2006,14:59)
If Synozeer implemented the feature, you would lie?  

How professional of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
No. I just wouldn't check it, which is what I said. If you're going to devolve into flaming, I ask that you take it to another thread.

--matt
These statements, and the ensuing arrogant, insulting, evasive and unprofessional postings from the IRE leader, remind me strikingly of another mud administrator of dubious character.
Vryce.

I guess Vryce wouldn’t check the box either.

And yes, this is a flame.
When you post flamebait, expect to be flamed.
Sinuhe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 07:14 AM   #31
Traveler
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 50
Traveler is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I guess you missed the latter half of Draeloth's post. In it he correctly states that the business model I intend to use (every business model, for that matter) relies on people knowing that it exists. I wasn't going to post off-topic and talk about how my project is related, but thanks for turning the spotlight.
I missed nothing. I merely made a statement in the same condescending immature manner utilized by yourself. Your 'spotlight' statement is further evidence that you have no use for the MUD playing community beyond the ability to line your pocket. I respond in kind to people the same way they address others.

On another note.

I am not a MUD admin I am only a player. I support this system because I believe it is imperative to have as much information as possible when making a decision. IRE is notorious for restricting the flow of information to players. EX: Not allowing the posting of reviews, discouraging the posting of required lessons for learning charts, avoiding disclosure that it is a pay for perk system until in game.

The more information the better.
Traveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 07:59 AM   #32
Valg
Moderator
 
Valg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Carrion Fields
Posts: 643
Valg will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Spoke @ Feb. 14 2006,20:10)
3) Mandatory Money Donations by some players to cover hosting costs.
4) Requirement to buy products from associates to cover hosting costs.

Add those to the list and it might display a true picture of what is the actual necesity of RL money to play the game.

Carrion Fields would check both, then many MUDs would have to check the 3rd (at least all of those that will appear on the first couple of pages and have not checked the previous two)
Actually, we'd check neither. We don't require our players to do either. We've had months (including most of our early years) where player donations didn't cover our expenses, and the ownership covered them out of pocket.

We really are free. I can't emphasize that enough. There are no "Mandatory money donations" or "Requirements to buy".
Valg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 08:06 AM   #33
Valg
Moderator
 
Valg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Carrion Fields
Posts: 643
Valg will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Drealoth @ Feb. 15 2006,01:54)
The problem here is that every MUD involving money has their own degree of requiredness.

Aardwolf gives donating players a special amulet with some minor stat boosts, although this is more in recognition than the player 'buying' the amulet. For most people, the donation is done to donate, not for this amulet. Is that pay to play?

With IRE paying money is optional, but without it it would be incredibly difficult for one to become successful in PvP combat (although one can still have a great time in the game without paying a cent).

Threshold charges $50 to play, and then you can play forever.

MUD2 costs about $10/month to play.

The list goes on. Every MUD would require their own category.
1) According to the_logos on another thread, Aardwolf sells ""trivia points" for $2/point, and "quest points" at a rate of 25 per $1."

Quest Points get you more access to all of this fancy in-game equipment, and that equipment "is very powerful and often contains special powers such as permanent haste or sanctuary." Trivia Points can get you custom favors other than equipment. Thus, if the_logos's data is correct (I have not independently confirmed this.. if someone from Aardwolf is around, I'd appreciate it), Aardwolf is pay-for-perks, just like IRE, and would check "optional fees".

2) IRE would check only the "optional fees" box. Threshold has a mandatory one-time fee, and is pay-for-perks afterwards. MUD2 has a recurring fee.

So far, all of those fit neatly into one of the four boxes I've proposed.
Valg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 09:38 AM   #34
Hardestadt
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 84
Hardestadt is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Drealoth @ Feb. 15 2006,05:58)
I don't see why you all have such a big problem with the IRE games.

Each of their games' websites have information about the credits system, and when playing the games as soon as you're finished the newbie quest you're told about the credits. As I'm sure the_logos will attest, IRE's business model relies on people finding out that one can spend money on their game.
Well, its motivated by a desire to make IRE's games look bad and send players instead to other games on the list.

There are a few differing motivations here. Valg wants to get further up the charts, and thus get more referals. KaVir is spiteful and wants to hurt Matt in any way he can manage. Sinuhe seems to have anger management issues. On this issue, they don't actually care about players being supposedly mislead at all, or the health of the community, or anything else that is being churned out by their bleeding hearts. The arguments are obviously fueled by their own motives.

-H
Hardestadt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 10:05 AM   #35
Valg
Moderator
 
Valg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Carrion Fields
Posts: 643
Valg will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Hardestadt @ Feb. 15 2006,10:38)
There are a few differing motivations here. Valg wants to get further up the charts, and thus get more referals.
Yup! I've even directly stated this before.

Of course, the only way we'd move up the charts by such a change is if new people come to the site and see "Oh. This other game involves optional/mandatory fees. I'd rather check out this free one." Also, these people would have to outnumber the people who prefer a pay-for-perks scheme because it lets them exchange money they have for time they don't.

I can't twist a player's arm and make them check out my site. But I can ask that the important information is made available up front.

If accurate, honest disclosure of information moves more people to my site (and Armageddon's site, and piles of other free options...), what is bad about that? It's better than the current concealment of that information.

(P.S.: Regarding your KaVir jab, you're aware that the_logos and KaVir agree on this issue, right?)
Valg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 10:16 AM   #36
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Hardestadt @ Feb. 15 2006,16:38)
There are a few differing motivations here. Valg wants to get further up the charts, and thus get more referals. KaVir is spiteful and wants to hurt Matt in any way he can manage.
Yeah, I specifically suggested removing the 'pay-per-play' option out of spite, because I knew it would force Matt to leave his mud listings exactly the way they are. Matt's outrage at this obvious attempt to hurt his mud is readily apparent by his response: "Anyway, Kavir is probably right insofar as the easiest and fairest way to do this is just to remove the option to select "pay for play" and make no comment about business model. I'm ok with that or truly full disclosure about revenue models."

Moron.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 10:23 AM   #37
KaVir
Legend
 
KaVir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Name: Richard
Home MUD: God Wars II
Posts: 2,052
KaVir will become famous soon enoughKaVir will become famous soon enough
Here's another spiteful suggestion: How about adding a text box called "payment model", which is completely optional. You can leave it blank, or fill it in, but if you fill it in it must be both truthful and complete - you can't say "completely free" if there's a registration fee, but you can say "one-off registration fee, then free to play". Other options might be "free to play, but you can buy out-of-game accessories such as t-shirts and mugs via the website" or "free to play, pay for perks, but perks can also be earned through non-payment activities".
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 10:28 AM   #38
Anitra
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Anitra is on a distinguished road
Hardestadt @ Feb. 15 2006,10:38
Quote:
Originally Posted by
On this issue, they don't actually care about players being supposedly mislead at all, or the health of the community, or anything else that is being churned out by their bleeding hearts. The arguments are obviously fueled by their own motives.
It's funny how you know so much about other people's motives, Hardestadt. Next I suppose you will claim that Matt's motives are purely altruistic?

The proposed information should be valid and desirable for a majority of players. Unfortunately the majority of players don't post to, or even read, discussion boards, so we won't hear from them here.

From a player's point of view, the reasons for wanting this type of info are very clear and straightforward. Most of the posters on this board seem to get it. The ones that don't, or pretend that they don't, clearly have 'their own motives' too.

Actually the violent opposition from certain mud owners against a system that to most people would seem logic, fair, correct and infomative makes me wonder what lies behind it.
Anitra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 10:37 AM   #39
Ytrewtsu
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 68
Ytrewtsu is on a distinguished road
It strikes me that a solution was proposed on a previous thread might actually fit the TMS listings a little better. Instead of having 10 boxes each with their own twisted little meaning, it would be very simple to have two boxes

() Commercial
() Noncommercial

Now it may not be outwardly clear to players exactly what this means for each specific game BUT it does clarify who is running their game as a business and who is running it as a hobby (not making a living off of it). I personally don't think it needs to get any more complicated than that. The players can take whatever inference they want from the boxes and the information would be accurate.

Ytrewtsu
Ytrewtsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 11:17 AM   #40
Aarn
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 44
Aarn is on a distinguished road
To quote Anitra:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Actually the violent opposition from certain mud owners against a system that to most people would seem logic, fair, correct and infomative makes me wonder what lies behind it.
This is really what it comes down to.  If money has an impact on gameplay in the MUD, then people searching for a MUD to play should know that up front.  It's as simple as that.

Of course people like myself, Valg and every other administrator from a truly free MUD have slightly selfish reasons for wanting this pointed out.  We want people to play our games, and we find it completely disingenuous that games that involve cash money get away with advertising themselves as free (or not telling people there is money involved until you're already immersed, which is nearly as bad).  Likewise, of course administrators like logos will fight against having it pointed out, because giving all of the information up-front to people seeking MUDS to play would be bad for their business.  There's a vast difference between pointing out that you can buy things with cash once you're already in the game or captivated by their website, and pointing it out when you're looking at a list of all the muds available to play.

Oh, and Claiming that Carrion Fields counts as a "pay for perks" MUD because someone could potentially cheat AND potentially not get caught and denied by the staff is one of the most ludicrous things I've read here.
Aarn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Any news about the search engine for commercial/no - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RPI Engine Now Available! Traithe MUD Announcements 7 12-15-2004 04:56 AM
New Mud Engine in C# bbg Advertising for Players 2 11-27-2004 11:07 AM
New Engine stofelese MUD Announcements 0 12-07-2003 12:42 PM
Custom Engine Project Seeks Talent Azeroth Advertising for Staff 0 08-01-2003 12:18 PM
Windows Engine yagiska Legal Issues 0 01-22-2003 05:16 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2014