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 12-29-2005, 03:31 PM   #61
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,299
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ Dec. 29 2005,16:22)
And KaVir again reflects my feelings on the difference between a 'good' MUD and a 'popular MUD'. In order to appeal to the masses, there is a certain amount of your creative energies which have to be suppressed and/or used for the appealing itself, and not for cutting-edge and original/exciting gameplay. This is very rarely untrue, from my long time of having played a large, wide variety of MUDs.
The fallacy there is equating "original" (can't say I almost ever see anything original on any MUD though) with "good." WoW is an excellent (in the minds of many people) popular game. It's also about as unoriginal as they come. The Sims is an excellent (in the minds of many people) and popular game. The Sims was also reasonably innovative.

'Good' is in the eye of the beholder. What you have to do to create a popular MUD is create a MUD that will be viewed as good by a reasonable number of people.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2005, 05:15 PM   #62
DonathinFrye
Senior Member
 
DonathinFrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Name: Donathin Frye
Location: Columbus, OH
Home MUD: Optional Realities
Home MUD: Atonement RPI
Home MUD: Project Redshift
Posts: 510
DonathinFrye is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to DonathinFrye
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The fallacy there is equating "original" (can't say I almost ever see anything original on any MUD though) with "good." WoW is an excellent (in the minds of many people) popular game. It's also about as unoriginal as they come. The Sims is an excellent (in the minds of many people) and popular game. The Sims was also reasonably innovative.

'Good' is in the eye of the beholder. What you have to do to create a popular MUD is create a MUD that will be viewed as good by a reasonable number of people.
Call me slightly snobby, but the attitude that caring what the vast majority of players look for in their opinion of a 'good' typical online mmorpg would support games like EverQuest/etc being considered good. While they might be addictive and popular, I've always preferred MUDing because I felt that it was on a higher gameplay/creative plane than popular Graphical MMORPGs. And the people who swear up and down by EverQuest/etc being the greatest game ever, I attitribute to the addictive qualities of the game that require you to pump enormous amounts of time into monster bashing/mundane questing.

I consider a good MUD to not embrace these qualities, but find more exciting and less repetative ways to entertain players. That's all - some large MUDs pull off what I would call a successful attempt at a 'good' game, others I find myself staying away from for more-or-less the same reasons I do EverQuest.

But, yes - to a certain extent, 'good' is in the eye of the beholder. But that generalization can be taken to any form of media. And no matter howmany platinums they sold, nobody will convince me that N'Sync is a good band, or that the new Chronicles of Narnia movie is anything more than a mass-media spoon-feeding sham. But again, maybe I'm just being annoying and snobby.
DonathinFrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2005, 05:27 PM   #63
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,299
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ Dec. 29 2005,18:15)
Call me slightly snobby, but the attitude that caring what the vast majority of players look forin their opinion of a 'good' typical online mmorpg would support games like EverQuest/etc being considered good. While they might be addictive and popular, I've always preferred MUDing because I felt that it was on a higher gameplay/creative plane than popular Graphical MMORPGs. And the people who swear up and down by EverQuest/etc being the greatest game ever, I attitribute to the addictive qualities of the game that require you to pump enormous amounts of time into monster bashing/mundane questing.

I consider a good MUD to not embrace these qualities, but find more exciting and less repetative ways to entertain players. That's all - some large MUDs pull off what I would call a success attempt at a 'good' game, others I find myself staying away from for more-or-less the same reasons I do EverQuest.
In other words, in your view Everquest isn't a good game, but in other peoples' view it is.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2005, 05:31 PM   #64
DonathinFrye
Senior Member
 
DonathinFrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Name: Donathin Frye
Location: Columbus, OH
Home MUD: Optional Realities
Home MUD: Atonement RPI
Home MUD: Project Redshift
Posts: 510
DonathinFrye is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to DonathinFrye
Yeah, we can agree there.
DonathinFrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 02:57 AM   #65
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 (Rathik @ Dec. 29 2005,04:37)
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ Dec. 28 2005,12:05)
Isn't that a rather circular argument?  It's a good mud because it has lots of players, and it has lots of players because it's a good mud?
A circular argument? And? What is there not to understand about it?
A circular argument is a fallacy, related to 'petitio principii' ("begging the question").

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Simply, a mud has to be "good" to hundreds players for hundreds players to play it.
No, it just has to be "good enough". Because the definition of "good" is in the eye of the beholder, no mud is going to appeal to everyone. In order to be as popular as possible, a mud would therefore need to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

As most mud creators will tell you, when designing and developing a mud, many features will force you to choose between "improving the overall game" and "being popular with the majority of the playerbase".

From time to time you'll see muds claiming that their every design decision is based entirely on the wishes of the playerbase (a pure 'popularity'-based approach), and such muds usually end up unplayable rarely last long - much like those which completely ignore the views of the playerbase.

Thus most muds will draw a middle ground between the two - even commercial muds which rely on large playerbases tend to have a strong vision of the direction they want their mud to go. For example, at least three of the commercial mud companies have taken the approach of offering multiple muds to appeal to a wider audience rather than trying to create a single mud that appeals to the lowest common denominator.

In summary, the point I am trying to make is that "good" is subjective and no feature is universally popular. The more people you try to appeal to, the more features you'll need to avoid, and this can impact the overall quality and individuality of your game.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 03:17 AM   #66
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,299
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (KaVir @ Dec. 30 2005,03:57)
In summary, the point I am trying to make is that "good" is subjective and no feature is universally popular.  The more people you try to appeal to, the more features you'll need to avoid, and this can impact the overall quality and individuality of your game.
At the same time, some features are only enabled as possibilities once you've achieved a large audience. For instance, things like players-governing-players doesn't become at all interesting until there's at least a couple dozen players, and player nations vs. player nations looks pretty silly until there are quite a few more players than that so that each nation has a minimally-sized citizenry of players. Raids that require large number of players are also not possible on MUDs with a small number of players (you can't have a 50 person raid on a MUD that doesn't even hit 50 simultaneous).

In other words, failing to appeal to a lot of players can also impact the overall quality and individuality of your game. I'm not trying to be snarky, but the point is that there are, equally, things that cannot be achieved by small MUDs that can be achieved by large MUDs.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 11:11 AM   #67
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 (the_logos @ Dec. 30 2005,10:17)
At the same time, some features are only enabled as possibilities once you've achieved a large audience.
True - but on the flip side, some features can also become infeasible once the audience grows too large. For example, in a very roleplaying-oriented mud a larger playerbase is going to result in less attention per player from the staff, and will also result in a "less personal" feel to the mud, whereby the player feels that they're just another insignificant face among thousands rather than someone who can actually make a difference within the game world. Equally, a particularly large playerbase is going to require more machine resources, which might become overly expensive for a mud which wouldn't or couldn't take money from the playerbase.

By its very definition a MUD is a multiplayer environment, and it's unlikely to ever be as much fun without player interaction. The ideal number of players is, like anything else, going to be a matter of opinion (and also depend upon the style of mud). But IMO this is still a separate issue from the mud itself; if a mud doesn't have enough players - or has too many players - for the style of game it promotes, then it's not going to be as much fun as it could be. But that doesn't mean the game itself is bad (or good, for that matter), only that it isn't operating at its full potential.

In an earlier post, DonathinFrye listed the number of players on various muds. One of your IRE muds had over three times the current playerbase of another of the IRE muds - but I'm sure you'd agree that that doesn't mean the former is three times as "good" as the latter, nor even that it's necessarily "better" at all.
KaVir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 11:33 AM   #68
Anitra
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Anitra is on a distinguished road
DonathinFrye:: Dec. 29 2005,16:22    

Quote:
Originally Posted by
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have I been living on another planet, or doesn't TMC only require you to enter a matching letter code in to vote? I just logged onto their website and voted for a MUD just now - the prompt showed me a typical anti-bot letter code that I had to match, and I did so, then clicking on "cast my vote".
I think what they are referring to is that on TMC you can cast 3 different votes. There is of course no need to adopt that part of their system, but the letter code seems to be a rather good way of making the list more secure from abuse.

This thread has provided some good input, and I really hope that the list Admin is following it.

Jazuela's suggestion of making separate lists for commercial and non-commecial muds is an excellent idea, that would be welcomed by a large part of the mud community.

There seems to be some sort of consencus that different people judge quality in a mud from different factors, and that a large player base isn't necessarily a factor, although it does have a positive effect when it comes tp PvP options.

This site should be about promoting the best muds, not just 'getting the most traffic to the site'.

A safer voting system would result in a fairer outcome of the listing.

Separate lists would give the high quality smaller muds, which are almost always non-commercial, a better chance of exposure, and consequently in the long run a better chance of  attracting more players.

I don't see how anyone could be against either of those suggestions.
Anitra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 12:02 PM   #69
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,299
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Separate lists would give the high quality smaller muds, which are almost always non-commercial, a better chance of exposure, and consequently in the long run a better chance of attracting more players.

I don't see how anyone could be against either of those suggestions.
It's quite easy to be against those suggestions. Why should MUDs that contribute relatively little get screen space in favor of MUDs that contribute much more to TMS? This site is effectively a traffic exchange, and it's not fair to ask the MUDs that contribute a lot to subsidize the MUDs that don't. It lessens the value of TMS overall by reducing the impetus for the MUDs that support the site to send traffic here. Keep in mind that the top 10 MUDs send more traffic than MUDs 11-100 combined.

This discussion is a bit moot anyway. The site's not going to be changed and if you want to use a voting site that implements suggestions like the letter code, use TMC. Of course, they get far less traffic on their voting list, for a reason. Same with Mudmagic.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 12:20 PM   #70
the_logos
Moderator
 
the_logos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Mill Valley, California
Posts: 2,299
the_logos will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by
True - but on the flip side, some features can also become infeasible once the audience grows too large. For example, in a very roleplaying-oriented mud a larger playerbase is going to result in less attention per player from the staff, and will also result in a "less personal" feel to the mud, whereby the player feels that they're just another insignificant face among thousands rather than someone who can actually make a difference within the game world. Equally, a particularly large playerbase is going to require more machine resources, which might become overly expensive for a mud which wouldn't or couldn't take money from the playerbase.
Sure, of course. There are advantages and disadvantages to almost any feature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by

By its very definition a MUD is a multiplayer environment, and it's unlikely to ever be as much fun without player interaction. The ideal number of players is, like anything else, going to be a matter of opinion (and also depend upon the style of mud). But IMO this is still a separate issue from the mud itself; if a mud doesn't have enough players - or has too many players - for the style of game it promotes, then it's not going to be as much fun as it could be. But that doesn't mean the game itself is bad (or good, for that matter), only that it isn't operating at its full potential.
Well, I don't entirely agree here. Insofar as MUDs are both products and services, I don't believe one can judge a MUD purely on a product basis (the code and the content). Other players and the player community are part of the service side and are always taken into account by potential and existing players in their judgements of a MUD.

As for objective 'bad' or 'good', well, I don't care. It's in the eye of the beholder. My personal opinion (and it doesn't matter to me if other people share it or not) is that a large MUD is, ipso facto, good insofar as it's managed to attract a lot of players that view it as good, while a small MUD is more nebulous. One can't really say it's bad, but, again, for me, small MUDs are simply indeterminate. They haven't, as you say, lived up to their potential, and it's far from certain the potential is there at all. Again, that's for me, and it's probably because my main interests in MUDs require larger player populations to work. No doubt others disagree, demonstrating the subjective nature of quality assessment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by

In an earlier post, DonathinFrye listed the number of players on various muds. One of your IRE muds had over three times the current playerbase of another of the IRE muds - but I'm sure you'd agree that that doesn't mean the former is three times as "good" as the latter, nor even that it's necessarily "better" at all.
No, I wouldn't, though I would say that the larger ones are more successful, given that I define success as achieving ones goals, and our goals are to create MUDs that will attract as many players as possible.

--matt
the_logos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 08:36 PM   #71
Sacac
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 23
Sacac is on a distinguished road
In response to the_logos’ post

“Why should MUDs that contribute relatively little get screen space in favor of MUDs that contribute much more to TMS? This site is effectively a traffic exchange, and it's not fair to ask the MUDs that contribute a lot to subsidize the MUDs that don't. It lessens the value of TMS overall by reducing the impetus for the MUDs that support the site to send traffic here. Keep in mind that the top 10 MUDs send more traffic than MUDs 11-100 combined.”



“As most mud creators will tell you, when designing and developing a mud, many features will force you to choose between "improving the overall game" and "being popular with the majority of the player base".”

As Kavir told us before, and the_logos brought to mind, the two ideas, Should we “Improve the overall game(I mean the website in this post)” and “Be popular with the majority of the player base?” I would go with the second thought, but doesn’t every mud pay the same amount of money to be listed? If that is so, everyone should get equal exposure. Just common sense, or make people pay different prices, which is just as unfair.

Two lists would accomplish this, IMHO. Why? It would separate the two biggest groups from each other, PtP and Free. I actually propose three lists though, P2P, free, and a combined list. That way, if you care, you can pick P2P or free. We can have the site automagickally load with a combined list, with the clickable words, Free and Commercial, on either side of the title. When you click them they show you the same page with a new list.
Sacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 09:07 PM   #72
Threshold
Legend
 
Threshold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,240
Threshold will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sacac @ Dec. 30 2005,21:36)
doesn’t every mud pay the same amount of money to be listed? If that is so, everyone should get equal exposure. Just common sense, or make people pay different prices, which is just as unfair.
You do not pay money to be listed here. You pay in traffic.

TMS is a traffic exchange site. I honestly do not understand why so many people refuse to understand and accept this.

So payment is in the form of the traffic you send.

The popular games send the overwhelming majority of the traffic to the site. Why should games that "pay" virtually nothing to be listed here (they send very little traffic) get a special list where they appear more prominently? That doesn't sound fair by any stretch of the imagination.

MUDs that send little traffic (and get less votes, and are lower in the rankings) already benefit inordinately. They send almost no traffic, but they benefit from the fact that every person who visits the site might see their game, or might go looking for a new game simply by being exposed to the list.

The example Matt gave earlier about WoW helps illustrate this. Would anyone here really care if WoW seized the top spot with 90 gazillion votes, bumping everyone down one notch? Think of all those players they'd be sending here to TMS to at least SEE that there are other games out there, and possibly give one of them a shot. Personally, I'd be THRILLED if WoW would join the list and send their millions of players here to vote. I played WoW, and I know there are a lot of people there are who only marginally satisfied, and would jump at the chance to try something new- something that might actually fit their tastes better.

When you understand and accept that the TMS list/front page is a traffic exchange, you can easily and quickly see why separate lists, or annoyances like typing in letter codes are not things that promote TRAFFIC. A traffic exchange that does not promote traffic is not doing its job.
Threshold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 09:29 PM   #73
Sacac
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 23
Sacac is on a distinguished road
Well threshold, those that do contribute so much will still be at the top of 2 out of 3 lists. While making the lists more convienant for people. Instead of forcing them to dig through pages of free muds so they can look at the P2P that is sprinkled within their territory.
Sacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 11:22 PM   #74
DonathinFrye
Senior Member
 
DonathinFrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Name: Donathin Frye
Location: Columbus, OH
Home MUD: Optional Realities
Home MUD: Atonement RPI
Home MUD: Project Redshift
Posts: 510
DonathinFrye is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to DonathinFrye
Perhaps I just mistakenly assumed that the purpose of a site like this was to promote the improvement of the MUDing community as a whole, centered around a repeating theme of Top-MUDs, which would infer holding itself to a standard of excellence and accuracy in voting - howmuch traffic would we really lose from having to add 15-20 seconds to a vote for a letter-code? I would venture to say that 98% of the traffic lost would be bots, and I'm not sure how great of payment bot-hits are anyways.

And in response to the smaller MUDs benefitting - you can see that the ratio of votes-in to clicks-out for the smaller webs does not really improve until the number of votes-in are so small that statistical data is no longer accurate for those MUDs.
DonathinFrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 12:38 AM   #75
Threshold
Legend
 
Threshold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,240
Threshold will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sacac @ Dec. 30 2005,22:29)
Well threshold, those that do contribute so much will still be at the top of 2 out of 3 lists. While making the lists more convienant for people. Instead of forcing them to dig through pages of free muds so they can look at the P2P that is sprinkled within their territory.
Sacac, seriously, can you please understand and accept that this is a traffic exchange? It is unfair to sites who send very little traffic to get their own list where they are shown more prominently. They aren't the sites that BRING the traffic. Why should they get special treatment. It doesn't matter if its 1 out of 3 lists, 2 out of 3, or 3 out of 3. It still goes against the nature of a traffic exchange.

As for "forcing someone to dig through pages of muds", come on. That's cake. You can easily select genres or other 20 MUD blocks right at the top, and that alone narrows things down so much that you get muds with very few votes on the front page. Anyone looking for a new mud has absolutely NO DIFFICULTY finding variety.

The truth of the matter, if you'd be willing to admit it, is that you (and many others) want to figure out some way- any way- to get less popular muds a more prominent location for where their mud gets listed. Such people want a mud that has not EARNED the prominence, by sending traffic, to get the prominent spot anyway.



Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ Dec. 31 2005,00:22)
how much traffic would we really lose from having to add 15-20 seconds to a vote for a letter-code?
Let me put it this way. *I* wouldn't even bother voting for my own mud every day if I had to enter some annoying code. I find having to do that sort of thing just more trouble than its worth. That's why I don't bother voting for my own MUD on TMC. It isn't that it takes a huge amount of time or anything. It is just that the value of a single vote is pretty small, compared with the annoyance factor of reading one of those obfuscated graphics and then typing in the letters.

It is just like the concept behind coupons. Companies that give coupons do so for two main reasons: the first is marketing, but the second is more interesting. They know that some people are willing to pay more for the exact same product. But they also know they can't have two prices for the same product, or else the people who pay the higher price will feel cheated. Thus, they give out coupons in newspapers, coupon books, etc. How does this work? The people who value their time more, and think it isn't worth their time to bother with clipping coupons, storing them, organizing them, remembering to bring them, etc. pay a higher price. People who value their time less, do all the things necessary to use coupons, and pay less. Voila! The seller just sold the product for 2 different prices, depending on how much the customer values his or her time.

I think any sort of obfuscated graphic with a letter code would dramatically reduce the amount of traffic to TMS. Not just bot traffic, but real traffic. That is antithetical to the goals of a traffic exchange site. You do not do things that REDUCE traffic. That would be Bad ™.

Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ Dec. 31 2005,00:22)
And in response to the smaller MUDs benefitting - you can see that the ratio of votes-in to clicks-out for the smaller webs does not really improve until the number of votes-in are so small that statistical data is no longer accurate for those MUDs.
Then why don't these muds just remove themselves from the list entirely, if they aren't benefitting?

The fact is, smaller games benefit a lot more, by percentage, than larger games with more players. The more popular games are risking their own players every time they encourage people to come here to vote. They are willingly exposing their players to lots of other games. The reward is higher placement on the list, which they hope will attract at least as many NEW players to replace those they lose by showing them all the other games that exist out there.

Why should small games get artificial, preferential placement when they haven't sent the traffic or risked the players that all the other games have?
Threshold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 01:01 AM   #76
Sacac
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 23
Sacac is on a distinguished road
I hate the activation code idea. Hate it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
The truth of the matter, if you'd be willing to admit it, is that you (and many others) want to figure out some way- any way- to get less popular muds a more prominent location for where their mud gets listed. Such people want a mud that has not EARNED the prominence, by sending traffic, to get the prominent spot anyway.
How can they EARN the prominence if they are buried so far into the database they can't even find themselves?

The truth of the matter, is that I firmly believe in providing for the good of the players and giving them every choice to pick the mud they like best. Instead of censoring (indirectly, but still censoring it, in my opinion), we make the whole community better instead of a few already massive muds and a random one here or there.

The point that smaller muds benefit more "Percentage wise" is kind of mute.

A massive mud can get 40 people and think nothing of it. (unless they all have the same playtimes)
A small mud can get five and it could add 44% more players, just like that. Still doing relatively little for the mud if they don't all log in at the same time.

I know threshold, we lay on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Sacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 02:31 AM   #77
Threshold
Legend
 
Threshold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,240
Threshold will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sacac @ Dec. 31 2005)
How can they EARN the prominence if they are buried so far into the database they can't even find themselves?
Maybe the way every other popular game earned their players? Create a good mud, rely on word of mouth, advertise, etc.

Is TMS supposed to be some kind of communist enterprise where popular games are supposed to supply less popular games with access to their players, prominent listings, etc?

Furthermore, it is very easy for a player to find less popular, smaller, or newer muds. You select one of the check boxes for 21-40, 41-60, a specific genre, or whatever. One click and there you go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sacac @ Dec. 31 2005)
The point that smaller muds benefit more "Percentage wise" is kind of mute.
What is mute about it?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mute

Do you mean MOOT?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=moot


Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sacac @ Dec. 31 2005)
A massive mud can get 40 people and think nothing of it. (unless they all have the same playtimes)

A small mud can get five and it could add 44% more players
How is that relevant? Again I ask you, are you wanting some kind of communist system where you take away from popular games to help less popular ones, not for any good reason, but just because the popular ones have more players?

That is a terrible idea. Furthermore, it will be killing the goose that lays the golden egg, because small games are getting otherwise unattainable publicity from being listed here. Why exactly should popular games bother risking their players by sending them here to vote, if the little muds get unfair placement? Then it becomes a valueless situation, and most of the traffic to the site dies. How does that help these little muds? Then they get ZERO new players, and have NO way of getting ANY attention because nobody sends traffic to the site.

They don't have the money to buy ads, and now they killed the traffic on TMS out of sheer jealousy.

Please reflect on the example of WoW. If we could get every graphical MMO on the TMS list, totally slaughtering us all in votes and pushing everyone down 5-10 notches, that would be one of the greatest boon to text muds since the first University let some creative gamers have a little computer space. Think of all those MILLIONS of gamers learning about text muds and every now and then saying "why don't I try one of these out?"

If that's too difficult, here's an even better example: MUD X (a game ranked higher than Threshold. that I won't name so I don't want to risk any kind of lame MUD v. MUD war). Am I happy to have Threshold down a notch because MUD X started pushing their players to vote recently?

I'm PSYCHED!!!!!

Why? Because we are getting tons of new players from MUD X. My referral logs are filled with people who found us while voting for MUD X. Most of them are people who like MUD X, but want a more IC/RP environment. I have no idea if they also quit MUD X, but that really doesn't matter to me.

So Threshold might be one notch lower in rankings, but the benefit is far superior because we are getting more players as a result of the increased traffic.

That's the beauty of TRAFFIC and EYEBALLS. That's what you want if you are trying to grow your mud, your business, whatever. You want your name somewhere where there is a CHANCE some people will see you and then give you a shot.

You (and others with the same type of ideas) are only shooting yourself in the foot by proposing changes that would ultimately reduce traffic, or run off the games that provide the traffic.
Threshold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 03:28 AM   #78
DonathinFrye
Senior Member
 
DonathinFrye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Name: Donathin Frye
Location: Columbus, OH
Home MUD: Optional Realities
Home MUD: Atonement RPI
Home MUD: Project Redshift
Posts: 510
DonathinFrye is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to DonathinFrye
I'm going to sum up my entire thoughts on this subject instead of engaging in a back-and-forth argument of what the purpose of this site is.

If you think that MUDs that are lucky enough to have large financial resources and who have sacrificed trying to be unique in order to be popular deserve to be featured in the MUDing community more than smaller MUDs that sacrifice improved/original gameplay for "commercial popularity", then I think you should quit MUDing and get into the Graphical MMORPG business.

Agree to disagree with me, but this snotty, commercial aspect to MUDing is against what the majority of the MUD community(as a whole) loves about the genre.

Voting should be as accurate as possible, and niche-filling MUDs should be as supported as ones who are run by capitalistic sham-ideas and not individuality. It isn't their not being on the Top Ten that bothers me(it's only natural), as much as some attitudes towards smaller MUDs here. Attitudes that reminds me of some of the frat boys up here at Penn State, whose close-minded egos fill in for other inches they lack.
DonathinFrye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 03:35 AM   #79
Threshold
Legend
 
Threshold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Home MUD: Threshold RPG
Posts: 1,240
Threshold will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ Dec. 31 2005,04:28)
If you think that MUDs that are lucky enough to have large financial resources and who have sacrificed trying to be unique in order to be popular deserve to be featured in the MUDing community more than smaller MUDs that sacrifice improved/original gameplay for "commercial popularity", then I think you should quit MUDing and get into the Graphical MMORPG business.

Agree to disagree with me, but this snotty, commercial aspect to MUDing is against what the majority of the MUD community(as a whole) loves about the genre.

Voting should be as accurate as possible, and niche-filling MUDs should be as supported as ones who are run by capitalistic sham-ideas and not individuality. It isn't their not being on the Top Ten that bothers me(it's only natural), as much as some attitudes towards smaller MUDs here. Attitudes that reminds me of some of the frat boys up here at Penn State, whose close-minded egos fill in for other inches they lack.
Luck? Where's the luck?

I had zero dollars to start Threshold with. I had no investors. I started it when I was a student. Any costs incurred were paid for by money I earned in crappy jobs I had before graduating.

That isn't luck. That is hard work and sacrifice.

I quoted your entire screed because it really slaughters your point. It is obvious you are motivated by some kind of communistic, anti-success belief that those who work hard and succeed should be penalized for their success and forced to subsidize others "just because" they are successful.

Nobody has slammed on small muds, or made a single negative comment related to WHY they are small. You, however, have chosen to slam every successful game as automatically being unoriginal. That is narrow minded and immature.
Threshold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2005, 04:20 AM   #80
Anitra
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Anitra is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The_logos
The site's not going to be changed and if you want to use a voting site that implements suggestions like the letter code, use TMC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Threshold:
TMS is a traffic exchange site. I honestly do not understand why so many people refuse to understand and accept this.
The reason might be that these people expected TMS to be something _more_ than just a traffic exchange site.  

And I still don't see how eliminating voting bots, or even having separate lists would be negative for the site. I also didn't realise that  the site has new owners. What happened to Synozeer?
Anitra is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Concern about the New Voting Rules - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reminder on voting rules. Lasher TMS Announcements and Feedback 0 05-29-2007 06:58 PM
Virtual Worlds - The Rules of Engagement the_logos Tavern of the Blue Hand 3 05-04-2006 12:36 PM
Rules for / moderation of reviews Fishy Tavern of the Blue Hand 2 04-12-2006 01:21 PM
More fun voting Hephos Tavern of the Blue Hand 1 06-11-2003 08:32 PM
Voting Tocamat MUD Administration 35 02-20-2003 04:48 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 05:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2014