Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
Go Back   Top Mud Sites Forum > Top Mud Sites News > Bugs and Suggestions
Click here to Register

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-10-2002, 05:19 PM   #21
Sapphar
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ Oct. 09 2002,11:56 pm)
So, the reason, in essence, is greed. If it really doesn't matter to you, you wouldn't be so vocal about it, but this has the potential to save some poor saps (my personal opinion) from dishing out more dollars to you and/or your MUD.
Orion,

First, to make sure there are no misunderstandings - I am not staff on any game. I am not a staff member of a PtP. I have been staff on free games and enjoyed the game and players in the past. I now play both free games and one PtP with investments into the characters and player bases of both types of games. With that information known (and with it, any biases I might have laid out)....

I do not want to see $$$ in front of game listings on the actual ranking page. I would never have gone to the game I have ended up spending most of my time at for nearly a year if it had a $$$ in front of the name. Not because I refuse to pay, but because I would have skipped right by its website and looked for a free game. After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.

The game I play has a very impressive website with amazing background and a detailed manual. I clicked the website button, I found a great site that completely drew me in, despite the fact I knew it was PtP within a few moments of hanging out at the site. I made the decision to pay for that game. But had I seen the dollar sign from the get go, I probably would have kept cruising the list looking for something free and missed ever seeing the excellent site.

Having or not having a dollar sign isn’t just about folks who CAN’T pay or REFUSE to pay. It also will draw away folks who aren’t really partial one way or the other, but out of habit will head to the free stuff first. If $$$ is added, it should be only one of many things that are told on the rankings page, among them: level of rp enforcement, years the game has been around, level of pk, class or classless style game, general theme, codebase, etc. There are a lot of details that draw folks to and from games.

(For those of you who want to notice, all of those things listed, including whether it is PtP, are variable. It would be quite difficult to create one simple set of icons to tell us if a game is any of the above. How many coders who have a heavily modified ROM game would want the generic ROM icon? How about a PK mud that puts everyone into the system, but has all sorts of checks and balances? Would they want the hardcore pk icon or would they want the “limited” pk icon that doesn’t represent what they have?)

Sapphar
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 05:43 PM   #22
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by (Sapphar @ Oct. 10 2002,5:19 pm)
(For those of you who want to notice, all of those things listed, including whether it is PtP, are variable. It would be quite difficult to create one simple set of icons to tell us if a game is any of the above. How many coders who have a heavily modified ROM game would want the generic ROM icon? How about a PK mud that puts everyone into the system, but has all sorts of checks and balances? Would they want the hardcore pk icon or would they want the “limited” pk icon that doesn’t represent what they have?)
Difficult like making a set of smiley face icons that you can choose from?  Hmmm, am I or , should I begin my post with my one-eyed green monster or the two-eyed blue guy?

I'm sure if Syn was interested it wouldn't be too difficult to design an icon layout that worked for most everyone.  
I mean, most the admins that run MU*s probably have a little experience with design in one aspect or another.  

Thats my only thing against the $$$ right next to the MU*s name in the ranking list.  It's conceptually silly, imho, to have that variable listed on ranks and as opposed to all others.

But thats my opinion.  Were I to find 2 MU*s that had all the positive things I looked for in a MU* and the only defining "drawbacks" were one was p2p and the other was heavy PK - I'd definitely put my quarter in the p2p one.  I pay for cable(**).  I pay for someone to cook for me when I go out to eat.  I pay for someone to BRING me my food when I go out to eat.  I pay for the cigarette companies to kill me(**).  A MU* is just another form of entertainment, one that you _could_ do without if you choose to.  And that choice is yours.

And finding an artist to make them probably wouldn't be so difficult, either, if the icon thing was chosen.  Heck, I'm sure there would be people that would loooooove to offer Syn with help like that.  If not, I'd offer my meager skills if asked - its the least any of us could offer for the service Syn provides.

** Actually, no I don't, but the example has merit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 06:04 PM   #23
Sapphar
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by (TG_Nek @ Oct. 10 2002,3:43 pm)
I'm sure if Syn was interested it wouldn't be too difficult to design an icon layout that worked for most everyone.  
I mean, most the admins that run MU*s probably have a little experience with design in one aspect or another
What I think would be difficult isn't creating cute icons, but rather making a reasonable number of them that would fit into a user-friendly little key at the bottom of the rankings page. If you have 5 options for pk, 5 for rp, 10 for codebase, 5 for types of commercial... well, keep going and you've got one hell of a big key to scan through while you try to figure all the cute little icons out.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 06:20 PM   #24
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

*shrug*

So don't flip through icons.  Pulling up the "modify records" option on MU*listing allows you to choose how you detail your MU* in its profile _mostly_ (but admittedly not all, a high [75%+] percent) by drop-down windows or check boxes.  Theoretically I can't see it being difficult to keep the same system (with a few modifications) when modifying your MU*'s profile and allowing the system to interpret the icons.

Ie, I pull down and choose my current PK type, the site has a pre-set icon for it.  I don't see the icon til later.  As for defining p2p options, a number of different theories were discussed in other threads on how to define them.  I can't see it being terribly difficult to do.

I still am all for not needing to post any of the info ($$$+) on the ranks page, but if deemed necessary I stand behind the icon theory.  

Proper design can overcome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 06:23 PM   #25
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Exclamation

Doh, I misinterpretted your post. Sorry.

Uhm. Yeah, well I guess a key at the bottom would have to be VERY self-explanatory, indeed.

Still think it's possible
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 07:42 PM   #26
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
Sapphar is a prime example of why I think the '$' icon, or some other p2p icon would be good. Sapphar plainly admitted to falling into the example I provided.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.
So, had you noticed the '$' symbols, you would more than likely still have the money you used on this p2p MUD AND you'd be playing a MUD out there that, first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more. THIS is why the '$' symbol is needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Having or not having a dollar sign isn’t just about folks who CAN’T pay or REFUSE to pay. It also will draw away folks who aren’t really partial one way or the other, but out of habit will head to the free stuff first. If $$$ is added, it should be only one of many things that are told on the rankings page, among them: level of rp enforcement, years the game has been around, level of pk, class or classless style game, general theme, codebase, etc. There are a lot of details that draw folks to and from games.
Ok, I get it now. It's better to lure them to your site to try to get them interested BEFORE they find out it's a pay site. Good idea... that way they can be disappointed that they were tricked into thinking it was probably free. OOOoOOOoo... that's so... crafty! Good thinking! Sorry, but if these MUDs are as good as they, and others, claim them to be, the fact that they're UPFRONT and HONEST about their MUD having a potential cost wouldn't hurt them. God, I feel like I'm dealing with a car salesman.

Anyway, to something more important... like being bashed in the face with a shovel. There are people who become addicted to MUDding. I don't know where the hell you've been living, the_logos, but look around you some time.

Definition 2a of 'addiction' from www.dictionary.com:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or or involved in something.
So, yes, it can be a psychological or physical, or even both, compulsive 'need' for something. People have, or have come close, to RUINING THEIR LIVES over MUDs. To say you can't be addicted to these games trivializes the problems those people face(d). I've seen people who've done this. They were my friends. I've seen them give up more than any person ever should. So do not EVER say you can't become addicted to online games. It can and DOES happen.
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 01:29 AM   #27
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion:
So, yes, it can be a psychological or physical, or even both, compulsive 'need' for something. People have, or have come close, to RUINING THEIR LIVES over MUDs. To say you can't be addicted to these games trivializes the problems those people face(d). I've seen people who've done this. They were my friends. I've seen them give up more than any person ever should. So do not EVER say you can't become addicted to online games. It can and DOES happen.
Speaking as someone who's first attempt at a bachelor's degree back in 1990 was foiled by mudding....  Had nothing to do with my lack of willpower tho.  I take no responsibility for my actions... It wasn't my fault I couldn't stand up to my weakness.  Right.

Back to the topic at hand....


Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sapphar:
After all, why pay if you can find what you want for free, right? And chances are, I would have found a free game I enjoyed well enough. But instead, I clicked on the website of a PtP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion:
So, had you noticed the '$' symbols, you would more than likely still have the money you used on this p2p MUD AND you'd be playing a MUD out there that, first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more. THIS is why the '$' symbol is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sapphar:
...I would never have gone to the game I have ended up spending most of my time at for nearly a year...
The rest of Sapphar's quote, to me, made this sound more like a point about a fortunate mistake than a complaint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion:
...first, probably needs more players, and second, you enjoyed just as much if not more.
If Sapphar enjoyed the game, what does it matter if they could've gone to a game that needs more players?  Sapphar enjoyed it enough to stay, and isn't that the point of a MU*, p2p -or- free, to a player?  As for your second point, you can say that with any MU* search you do.  I can swing by TPE and be completely satisfied with it, never realizing that Inferno is ACTUALLY much more to my liking.


Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion:
Sorry, but if these MUDs are as good as they, and others, claim them to be, the fact that they're UPFRONT and HONEST about their MUD having a potential cost wouldn't hurt them.
Actually, since most this hub-bubs come up, bub, most the admins I've seen of these p2p's have tried to be more open with the fact that its p2p as opposed to free.  Mostly I site the forums posts and the MU*'s profiles (which is the only place that has p2p as an option where one is prompted to define).

To say they are not being upfront and honest about their postings because it does _not_ say it in the ranking list that they are _not_ a free MU* is like accusing Dragon's Den of not being honest for not putting they are _not_ a WoT MU* in the ranking list.  You come to this site hopefully for the forums, to show love for your favorite MU*, and to see what else is out there - no matter how diverse it is.  As far as I've seen, there is no "standard MU*" which defines how everyone should differentiate their's.  This is not just a FREE MU* site or a theme-oriented MU* site - it's just a MU* site.  And until Syn offers it up as otherwise, there should be as much differentation and segregation between a free vs p2p MU*s as there should be as against Custom v GodWars MU*s.

Another thing, I would think if I were running a p2p MU* for over a decade and I decided to advertise on a site called topmudsites.com I probably wouldn't think about the need to "offer up" the fact that I was p2p as opposed to if the site was called topfreemudsites.com.  If I were posting my MU* on wotmudlisting.com I probably would be a little suprised when the current community browsing the forums got all irate because I didn't post that I didn't allow elves.

I'm sorry Orion, your posts (to me) seem more directed at just shooting down p2p muds specifically than actually trying help figure out a better way to inform the public about certain restrictions muds have.

From what I've been able to gather..top 10 p2p Mu*s...
Dragon Realms (listed p2p Info)
Gemstone III (listed p2p Info)
Threshold RPG (listed p2p Info)
Eternal City (not listed as p2p)
Herc & Xena (listed p2p Info)
Dragon's Gate (Info not connecting)

The 'newcomers' admins have put forth an effort to adopt to the ranking/profile/advertising written and unwritten rules put forth by this site.  In fact, its seems to be everyone BUT them clamboring for additional scrutiny because of it.  From what I've seen and read, they've tried to be somewhat accomodating given the unwelcome greeting they've been shown.  In fact, I'd say they've acted rather

professional

about it.


*looks at the crowd bearing pitchforks, torches, and axes gathering around him*  
Yeah... I think I've said more than my piece.  
*ducks for cover*
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 01:35 AM   #28
Dulan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 354
Dulan is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Dulan
You forgot Achaea on that listing, TG_Nek.

-D
Dulan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 02:00 AM   #29
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
Being addicted to something has nothing to do with will power. Being able to break that addiction has to do with will power. Note the difference.

As for me slamming P2P MUDs, I have nothing against them. I personally wouldn't play them, because, as I mentioned, I have better things to do with my money... like giving it to someone who likes to set it on fire... but what other people do with their money is of course their choice, and that's great.

As for my point about MUDs that need more players, it's this simple. MUDs that charge more than likely have plenty of players. They don't NEED more. Free MUDs... good ones... die on a regular basis because they receive a lack of support.

You're trying to compare codebase to cost. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. The codebase they have isn't going to cost me any money... a cost factor on the other hand, would. Getting people interested is one thing. Getting them interested on an assumption that a MUD is more than likely free is another entirely. If you don't see that, I see no point in continuing to argue the point with you, because you're obviously thickheaded.

But, fighting AGAINST having an upfront listing, as the_logos has done so hard, is the same as trying to deceive someone. Putting it in an information listing is all good and well... but putting it on the ranking list is a good step to follow, in my opinion.

But, either way, good day to you. I'm going to go do something more productive now... like play with a bar of soap, or something.
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 05:08 AM   #30
Seraphina
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 49
Seraphina is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
As for my point about MUDs that need more players, it's this simple. MUDs that charge more than likely have plenty of players. They don't NEED more. Free MUDs... good ones... die on a regular basis because they receive a lack of support.
If good free muds are failing I think they need to look for reasons other than the existence of commercial muds. Free is a very strong draw. It might be helpful for admins of free muds to check out the p2p's from the perspective of novices and see how they differ.

As non-mudding friends to spend an evening trying both, a good free, and a p2p, and ask them for their opinions on why they might choose one over the other.
Seraphina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 08:28 AM   #31
Kyrie_S
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4
Kyrie_S is on a distinguished road
Exclamation

Heh, i was reading over this board and mused at all this interesting input that is suddenly coming in from the influx of p2p muds. I really only have 3 things to say.

1) People are generally raised on the term, "You get what you pay for"

2) Sadly, they also are raised on the term "The best things in life are free"

3) P.T. Barnum said it best when he uttered "There's a sucker born every minute"

So now ill leave it to the cockroaches
Kyrie_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 08:51 AM   #32
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

"I'm" thickheaded?

*looks at the clock, already 15 minutes late for work*

Grrr.

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 10:07 AM   #33
Reason
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 8
Reason is on a distinguished road
Thumbs up

I feel like a traitor saying this since I mainly play a p2p, but I see one big problem with this whole thing.  Because of it, I really wish there could be two separate lists, one for free and one for p2p.  If that isn't possible, I think people should be able to just do a search and get only a list of free games.

I've always seen this place as a chance for small, free MUDs to get some exposure and maybe find new players. It's turning into just free advertising for the p2p games instead.  Add to that people like Seraphina posting insults about the little guys and how they don't have players because they aren't good enough and I think a lot of people are going to be leaving.

I'm not sure if this is a good comparison or not but it's the one that comes to my head.  I think of it like a community theater, with room for 10 plays to be held at the same time.  Who gets to use the stage depends on how many people want to see the show.  Even though the theater itself gets no money for the plays, it does advertise for all of those that are showing each week.

In the beginning a few small groups write and direct their own plays and everybody has a chance to be the star for the week.  Things would change totally if a Broadway play decided to compete there with well known stars and directors and expensive sets.  Since the theater doesn't charge these people could give a discount on tickets and still make the same amount they would at a larger theater in addition to having the free advertising.

Most of the people who pay to see these plays would be paying anyway, but it still hurts the little guys.  Fewer of the free plays would get to be onstage and those who do may have to resort to getting a few better known actors and paying them or spending money in other ways to compete better which would mean having to charge for their own plays.  

It also hurts the people who go to watch the plays.  There might be some great actors, some potential hit plays and even some very talented directors who never get the chance to be seen because they didn't get the votes.  More and more people would start going to the commercial plays because they assume they're better even when that's not the case.  Eventually the theater would be nothing but an Off Broadway theater who gives free advertising and gets nothing in return, leaving the original groups to hold their plays in a shed behind the main building.

I know it isn't quite that bad - yet, but I do see it as a potential problem.
Reason is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 11:28 PM   #34
TG_Nek
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
Being addicted to something has nothing to do with will power. Being able to break that addiction has to do with will power. Note the difference.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with that.  But given contemporary theory on how addiction is defined, I couldn't debate it correctly either.  So I'll concede this one with little regret. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
As for my point about MUDs that need more players, it's this simple. MUDs that charge more than likely have plenty of players. They don't NEED more. Free MUDs... good ones... die on a regular basis because they receive a lack of support.
Simple?  Heh.

Logistically, based solely on the criteria on MU* cost, I would _think_ free MU*s would generally be more popular than p2p ones.  That would seem a simple conclusion to me.  Given the high-player base of some of these p2p games, I would think...
1) they must offer something above and beyond that which is currently considered "good" on a free MU*.
2) their playerbase is unfamiliar with the fact that there are free MU*s.

Frankly, I think, logistically, free MU*s SHOULD be able to benefit more than p2p's with p2p's advertising here or sending their pbase here to vote/forum.  Why?  Because if a player from a p2p MU* finds an equally entertaining free MU* on Top Sites and is not against "free MU*s", there is more of a chance that player will switch than if a player from a free MU* found an equally entertaining p2p MU* on Top Mud Sites and is not against "p2p MU*s".   And when I say equal, I mean EQUAL in terms of area quality, code, theme taste, etc, etc (friends on the playerbase and loyalty to the first MU* not considered).

I can't possibly see a good, free MU* dying from lack of support.  If you mean support in terms of financial support, then the fault is there own, and a free-playing playerbase could, obviously, do little to save that without donations.  If by lack of support you mean a small player-base, then again, the fault is their own by being too ego-driven.  I've seen more than my share of mornings alone on my MU*, whilst I build.  I think my MU*s pretty decent and hope one day it will catch a fairly decent playerbase (imo, btn 30-50 at peak).  We've had our periods of growth, we've had our periods of decline - every MU* has them.  If a MU* ever dies it is because the drive to see it succeed has died out in those running it.  If it is because of lack of a player base, I'd consider that ego driven.  A person running their MU* for the sake of garnering and catering to many players with no true design of their own would probably give up their MU* quicker than someone who carefully crafted their world out of their own desire to express their creativity,  if all their players went to another MU*.  Would you rather have a woman who does everything you say, gives you everything she has, and has no life/opinion of her own - or a woman who is her own and you want to be with because you enjoy that spirit?  My personal opinion is that a "good" MU* is crafted for the sake of bringing a world to life, as opposed to one that offers anything it needs to in order to satisfy its people.  Perhaps would be good to akin it to taking pride in yourself for who you are versus taking pride in the acclaim others give you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
If you don't see that, I see no point in continuing to argue the point with you, because you're obviously thickheaded.
*smirk*

My official vote is not to put any sort of markings on the ranking page and do nothing to change how things are currently done.

Seeing how that does not seem to be the popular opinion, I am attempting to see things and listen to the opinions of others.  

So I am attempting to separate myself from my "feelings" on the situation, and debate down to where the issue lies.

I do not believe that constitutes being "thickheaded".  While I appreciate you containing anything else you wished to call me that might seem more ....flaming, I would think my debating issues on a side I do not necessarily agree with (to offer up something I feel to be a bad idea in order to prevent something I feel would be worse) would qualify me as something on the other side of the fence from "thickheaded".  Also, as a designated leader within another forum, I am suprised you resorting to common name-calling within a debate forum.  I would think moderators to be better than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
You're trying to compare codebase to cost. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. The codebase they have isn't going to cost me any money... a cost factor on the other hand, would.
Yes, indeed. A cost factor _may_ cost you money.  No arguments there.  I am in whole agreement with that.  
And to YOU that may be an incredibly viable thing that separates X MU* from Y MU*.  Many people may agree with you.  Nations may rally behind it.
But that is something important to YOU.
Cost may not be the all-important to others.  It is not important to ME.
To ME, a MU*'s rp/pk ratio is the most viable difference btn X MU* and Y MU*.
To JFK, a MU*'s codebase may be the most viable difference btn X MU* and Y MU*.
My opinions and JFK's opinions may differ from most everyone else's out there.  It makes our opinions on what is the most deciding factor in a MU* we choose to swear off no less legit than yours.

I am looking beyond my opinion of "we shouldn't change the current layout because if people want more in-depth knowledge of a MU* they should research beyond the ranking page" and hearing people say "make p2p MU*s declare their misbegotten ways on the ranking page" and interpretting it as "this MU* has a difference that _I_ find important enough that it should be posted on the ranking page".  Again, not very thickheaded.  If you cannot look beyond what you are saying and seeing how it relates to the concept design of the site as a whole, then there probably is no further need to debate this.  I do not wish to step down further and isolate MU*s on a single difference they have and you do not wish to step up from your view that a single difference is an all-encompassing and so important an attribute that it transcends all others and needs its own distinguishing marker on the ranking page as opposed to the info page.

And thats what makes us all unique, no?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
Getting people interested is one thing. Getting them interested on an assumption that a MUD is more than likely free is another entirely.
Okay, past that.  Most of them seem to have posted it under features as it is listed to post.  Thats the current standard, thats where most of 'em are listing.  Little seem to have any problem with it.  *yay*
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
but putting it on the ranking list is a good step to follow, in my opinion.
:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Orion Elder writes:
But, either way, good day to you. I'm going to go do something more productive now... like play with a bar of soap, or something.
Well, thats the 2nd time you've left on a "this topic isn't worth my time" sort of note.  Cheers to me to catching, I suppose you'll say.  Still, if it is not important to you or you feel debating it is not productive, then why even debate it?

As for the_logos...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
the_logos writes:
I really have no objection to it. It just seems like it's a really arbitrary piece of info to put up there.
Page 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dulan writes:
You forgot Achaea on that listing, TG_Nek.
Errrrr.  I was hoping someone would miss that :p  Not to open it for debate here, but my current opinion is I would look more towards not classifying Achaea as p2p if I had only "free" and "p2p" to choose from.  KaVir is posting some very relevant points on how people who donate time/money/etc to the betterment of the MU* should be rewarded that I agree with (hence my quietness on the topic over there).  If it _were_ needed to be qualified in some sort of "Cost" field in Info, I'd probably suggest it in a spot between 'Free' and 'Pay to Play' called 'Donation Enhanced" or some such.

Anyway.  Thats been an hour + of fun.  I think I'll go grab a bar of soap and do something practical with it too.  :)
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2002, 11:47 PM   #35
Dulan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 354
Dulan is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Dulan
If you use that line of reasoning, TG_Nek, then Simultronics runs no pay to play MUDs.

It is simple. If you have to pay money for benefits - whether that be access to the game, or for uber-cool item of the month - it is a P2P. Using that definition, we avoid the maneuvering of Vryce/Mihaly.

-D
Dulan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2002, 12:55 AM   #36
Seraphina
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 49
Seraphina is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by
If you use that line of reasoning, TG_Nek, then Simultronics runs no pay to play MUDs.

It is simple. If you have to pay money for benefits - whether that be access to the game, or for uber-cool item of the month - it is a P2P. Using that definition, we avoid the maneuvering of Vryce/Mihaly.
Simtronics is pay to play and is very up front about it. You MUST pay. They do offer a 30 day free trial but if you don't pay after that point then your account is closed.

You do not HAVE to pay to play Achaea because you do not HAVE to get the extras offered and your account is not closed because you refrain from buying extras. You can therefore pay Achaea for free.

It can be argued either way therefore it would be up to the mud owner to define how to classify it. Better to offer sufficient choices to be accurate leaving the potential player to draw whatever line is to be drawn themselves.

I do think it is misleading to place payment options in areas a player won't see right away. But it would be equally misleading to call a game pay to play if it can be played for free. One approach is no better than the other because it conceals information.
Seraphina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2002, 01:45 AM   #37
Lanthum
Member
 
Lanthum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Suburbs of Chicago
Posts: 138
Lanthum is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to Lanthum
Quote:
Originally Posted by (Dulan @ Oct. 09 2002,12:34 pm)
This is inapplicable, and is solely designed to make the vocal minority's complaint about this appear as if they are the majority.

I do not vote in polls. I know many that are for the $'s being added do not vote in polls. And, furthermore, these options are irrelevant. Only three, possibly four, are even truly relevant - and it ignores several options that have been brought up, and are superior to the ones on this poll.

-D
I came here looking to get away from Posts like this on other boards, and of coarse, it happens here as well.  

Yes, unlike what you try and say in your second post - your insinuations in this first post are that you "know" what other people do and don't do.

If by this point in your life you haven't figured it out yet - if you haven't got anything constructive to say, just keep your mouth shut.

Please.
Lanthum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2002, 01:45 AM   #38
Dulan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 354
Dulan is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Dulan
Seraphina, that subject has been covered on TMC too many times to count. Especially in flames about Achaea's administration.

Care to be able to ignore the rules? Pay!
Care for a super-character in next to no time? Pay!
Care for a character that takes 6 months to build and takes someone that pays 6 days to build? Don't pay!

I know TMC has more information there.

Lanthum....Adventurer's Inn? Same person that logged onto a MUD I coded for, spammed the MUD with tells to come play it?

Furthermore, I know it - because I've talked with those people. People voted at first because it was 'amusing'. Now, the glamour of the vote has worn off, and it's unamusing now. Some people have voted that would otherwise not vote, as the vote counts make it obvious, but nonetheless...

-D
Dulan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2002, 02:24 AM   #39
Orion Elder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 346
Orion Elder is on a distinguished road
First, I will address the point about players. Most people who PAY for a shell account are doing so because they enjoy providing an entertainment for others. I like to entertain people. That's not, however, why I make a MUD. My MUD is hosted on my own machine, and isn't open for players. See the difference? People who pay for a shell, usually, are doing so because they like to entertain. If they can't find people to give them feedback on what they do, they feel as though they have wasted their time. I say this from experience, as I can list five MUDs, right now that I played that died for this reason. That's not even counting the MUDs I have worked for, or have helped with.

So, while that whole 'free' should be enough of a pull... it's not. The average MUDder, in my experience, judges the quality of a MUD not by the quality, but by how many players it has. Lot of players? Good MUD. Not a lot? Gotta suck. I speak, again, from experience. From the MUDs I've played, to the MUDs I've worked on, and to the MUDs I've run. People log in, they don't see people, most of the time they won't even give the MUD a chance.

You log into a p2p, the common human bias already tells you two things... if they're charging, they must have SOMETHING good going... and if they have players, they must be doing something RIGHT. Is this true? Not on your life. They MIGHT be doing something right, and they MIGHT have something good.

Further more, you speak of the logical reasoning. How often have you known of people to be logical? Especially when it comes to entertainment. "Professional Wrestling," anyone?

You may, or may not, see the problem here. I don't know, and honestly I don't really care. I do, however, have an overwhelming need to give my opinion, whether wanted or not, in a thread which, as you pointed out, I feel has dragged on far too long, and in turn is not worth the time. But, it gives me something to do, and I'm bored at the moment.

As for me insulting you, I did no such thing. I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
If you don't see that, I see no point in continuing to argue the point with you, because you're obviously thickheaded.
Now, that's an 'if' statement. Not sure if you're familiar with programming, but basically, if (variable == true) then (this). So, if (you don't see that) then (I see no point in continuing to argue the point with you, because you're obviously thickheaded). So, basically, you said you don't see that and thus it became an insult to you. So, I would thank you to not make me out to have been insulting you when you confirmed the statement to be true. If, however, you understood my point, then that did not apply to you, anyway. But, that's enough for a sidepoint.

Anybody got some bubble gum they'd like to share? Bah, probably not. Damn conspiracies.

But, before I deviate the topic too much, I'm going to head on out. If you want to continue this discussion in private, feel free to PM me. *wave*
Orion Elder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2002, 02:43 AM   #40
Brody
Moderator
 
Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Carolina
Home MUD: OtherSpace
Posts: 1,599
Brody will become famous soon enoughBrody will become famous soon enough
Send a message via Skype™ to Brody
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Reason says:
I've always seen this place as a chance for small, free MUDs to get some exposure and maybe find new players. It's turning into just free advertising for the p2p games instead.  
You know, not so long ago, I posted that we should all just sort of grin and bear it as the big pay-to-play games sidle into the rankings here. But Reason's post hits the nail right on the head. Pay-to-play games, if they're doing something right and successfully, have the budget to PAY for advertising. The smaller free games don't. So, when the pay-to-play games dominate the TMS rankings, they're getting what amounts to a free ride.

Perhaps a second list would be best, but ultimately this rests with Synozeer. It's his site; his rules.
Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


$ Info, le Poll - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Daedalus Project info the_logos MUD Administration 0 10-20-2005 01:41 PM
MUD-Con I Info Orion Elder MUD Announcements 1 10-15-2002 03:14 AM
Mud Info : Add $ or no $ ? hoop Bugs and Suggestions 113 10-14-2002 04:57 AM
Poll Feyona Tavern of the Blue Hand 18 09-14-2002 07:29 PM
The people or the info ? Shao_Long Tavern of the Blue Hand 7 05-14-2002 12:57 PM

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 10:56 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