[Rawcliffe]

After being a member of these boards for quite few months now, mainly reading for RP ideas, I have to ask why alot of the free muds are so angry when it comes to P2P games. I understand many of you have woderful communites/games and you would like to recruit new members to come and join you. As a player of a P2P game I dont come here to try and wrangle people for money, but instead share my great experiences I have had in my game. Yes the game I play cost money unfortunately, but after playing quite a few games over the years I would quickly pay it becuase its the game that suits me best. It has everything that I care for. Maybe I just misunderstand the purpose of this board, but for me I thought it was a place to introduce and discuss the games we all know and love. All well, those wer my thoughts take them as you will.

Player of an evil P2P mud
Jerry

[jornel]

Good to hear from you, Rawcliffe

I think that most people here don't consider p2p games 'evi', but I do know that some of them wish that the p2p muds had a little icon or '$' in their ranking listing -- a topic that has been beaten to death previously on another thread.

I would be interested in hearing you share your good experiences on any game (whether p2p or free), as well as your reasons why 'it is the game that suits you best'.

I'm sure there are more than a few mud admins out there who'd appreciate knowing what holds you to your game.

[Orion Elder]

The issue at hand here is that the P2P games try, in some cases, to 'hide' themselves as a free game long enough to grab a few players and get them hooked long enough that they can do the old 'Oops, we forgot there IS a SMALL $10 monthly fee to keep playing... but for all the fun you had, isn't it worth that PIDDLY amount of money?'

First, if it's so "PIDDLY" then why do they care if they get paid? If $10 is so "SMALL" to them, why don't they just pay for me to play instead.

But, aside from that, the main issue I've seen, and that I take issue with (and I don't even have a MUD listed anymore)... is that these P2P games are essentially stealing advertising. Being a P2P they can afford advertising. Most free MUDs by and large can not afford to go out and pay to advertise a free game. So, they look upon bastions in the community like Top MUD Sites, to notify the world they exist. But, then the P2P games jump in, knock off a few extra slots on the list, try to pretend they're not a P2P game with careful wording (payment to advance is still P2P, whether it's required or not), and take off some of the few places that could have been used to get a couple of one vote MUDs listed in the 80-100 section.

But, essentially, that's why some are bitter. Those free MUDs that can't afford to pay for advertising are losing ranking positions to MUDs that could easily advertise elsewhere.

[Rawcliffe]

I guess I just had a misconception of the purpose of this board then.  When I discovered it I thought it to be an open forum for MUDs in general.  A place to see different games available, learn some basics, give designers a place to change it up and share thoughts and experiences.  Instead, there seems to be more of Im better than you or I can believe your Mud does that.....

In my opinion, people are not idiots.  If they dont want to pay for a game, they wont.  At least in the case of my game its no big secret that its P2P.  I wouldnt care how it got signfied that its P2P.  If somebody wants to play a free game, I dont think it makes a difference if BIG (which my game is not all that big) games are listed as #1 because they wont play them and continue down the list to the games that got bumped down a few notches.  As for the games that are listed  in 81-100 range, if they truly care to utilize the ranking system to stay on the boards for advertizing reasons it only takes 2 daily voters to achieve a <50 ranking.

On a side note, this battle seems to heat up so much sometimes I believe many of those in the arguments are causing more damage to their ability to recruit new players through their words of hate that they lose to being a rank below a P2P game.

In short, I believe players will just as quickly join a free game with our without P2Ps being ranked among them if that is what they are looking for.  If paying for a game doesnt matter to a player then the the ranking system wouldnt hinge on this matter anyway.

I will not post again on this topic, but I will read your thoughts and concerns.  I just wanted what others though and to give my own opinion without trying to start a big argument on the whole thing.  This a great tool for Mud players for many reasons other than the ranking system.

And I rest my conversation on this topic.

A player,
Jerry

[Rawcliffe]

And Wow I forgot about that cool lil pic I have for my Icon. I need to snag it and take it to the IC boards of my game. Seeing I play a ruby dragon.

The Ruby,
Rawcliffe

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ Jan. 21 2003,11:29) The issue at hand here is that the P2P games try, in some cases, to 'hide' themselves as a free game long enough to grab a few players and get them hooked long enough that they can do the old 'Oops, we forgot there IS a SMALL $10 monthly fee to keep playing... but for all the fun you had, isn't it worth that PIDDLY amount of money?'

Speaking as a game that uses a shareware method of payment, I can add a bit of insight here. I should mention, however, that you cannot even create a character on Threshold without having the system of payment explained in great detail.

You have to keep in mind that anyone charging money in ANY WAY on the internet, be it a game, website, or even software, is still fighting an uphill battle against the huge amount of people who think everything on the internet should be free. This is very unfair to people who invest enormous amounts of money and professional levels of time and committment (not hobby levels) to the product or service they are making available.

On usenet this week, in one of the general RPG discussion groups, there was even a huge debate as to whether or not it was ridiculous and absurd that MMORPGs charge a monthly fee. There are still A LOT of people who do not even understand that server farms, tons of bandwidth, advertising, and staff to produce new content and provide customer service cost a great deal of money.

So while you make some good points, I think you should also keep the above in mind.

Originally Posted by First, if it's so "PIDDLY" then why do they care if they get paid?

I am sure you would not make such tongue-in-cheek statements if the suggestion was that every now and then your boss/employer/clients/etc. simply not pay you.

[Azhon]

I have no problem with pay muds, as long as they mention they're pay muds somewhere on the page.

They're easy to bypass by having a look at their webpage anyhow.

[Orion Elder]

Originally Posted by Speaking as a game that uses a shareware method of payment, I can add a bit of insight here. I should mention, however, that you cannot even create a character on Threshold without having the system of payment explained in great detail.

That's nice. Is it mentioned in your listing here on TMS? What about your MUD's info link? Didn't think so. You are as bad as the rest of them. You lure them in enough to get them in the doors, when more than likely many of the people lured in would bypass you outright.

Originally Posted by You have to keep in mind that anyone charging money in ANY WAY on the internet, be it a game, website, or even software, is still fighting an uphill battle against the huge amount of people who think everything on the internet should be free. This is very unfair to people who invest enormous amounts of money and professional levels of time and committment (not hobby levels) to the product or service they are making available.

You POOR babies. Rest your head on momma's shoulder. In case it's not obvious, you have no sympathy from me. YOU decided to make a product on the net. If it's hard work, that's YOUR problem. No one else's. Sorry, but how many of us have run free games. No charges what so ever... even voluntary ones? You expect to make money. We don't. In general, we can't afford to pay for advertising. If you run a pay MUD and can't afford to fork out a little for advertising, you're in the wrong business... that or you have no confidence in your product. So, instead you come out and steal advertising from free MUDs who need it. Right. You deserve SO much pity. Poor you.

Originally Posted by On usenet this week, in one of the general RPG discussion groups, there was even a huge debate as to whether or not it was ridiculous and absurd that MMORPGs charge a monthly fee. There are still A LOT of people who do not even understand that server farms, tons of bandwidth, advertising, and staff to produce new content and provide customer service cost a great deal of money.

Yes. We should go out and pay $60 for the software to run the game, then pay $10 more per month to play it. Yeah. That's reasonable. Please, note the pouring sarcasm. At least in this respect P2P MUDs are better than games like Everquest, as the ability to log into them is free. I also don't define any MUDs as MMORPGs as I doubt any MUD has the type of playerbase that something like Everquest has. But, this is a fairly useless point. Because advertising... well, you're getting that for free off of your TMS ranking. *smirks* Many of these P2P games, from what I've heard, also run on a volunteer staff. So, no cost there, either... if you pay your staff, good for you.

Originally Posted by I am sure you would not make such tongue-in-cheek statements if the suggestion was that every now and then your boss/employer/clients/etc. simply not pay you.

Your example is flawed. We're talking company to client relations, not company to employee relations. Furthermore, to make your example more accurate it should be "I am sure you would not make such tongue-in-cheek statements if the suggestion was that every now and then you decided your boss/employer/clients/etc. didn't have to pay you." Which, btw... I have on occasion overlooked costs owed to me by clients. Next, most places try to downplay the cost as a minimal cost... if the cost is so minimal, you shouldn't worry about whether or not you get paid.

[Sidmouth]

Just to hilight one or two of Orion's points and clarify: I don't think people are opposed to paymuds in general here, I think they're opposed to paymuds dominating the rankings.

These rankings are a great way for free muds to advertise, since they most likely cannot afford the $100++ it takes to advertise on mudconnector or with banners here on topmudsites. They are probably already paying out of pocket for hosting, so any free advertising is much appreciated.

When p2p muds take up many of the top spots, I think the general feeling is, why don't they just stick up a banner instead of urging their players to vote all the time.

Having served as a senior admin on a free mud, I can't say strongly enough how difficult it is to attract players without any money to work with

[MelissaMeyer]

Alright guys ... I'm generally a nice gal, but I'm having a teeny bit of problem with being slapped in the face repeatedly.

Let me clarify a couple of things for you again.

The pay games, by and large serve more users than all the other MUDs in the top 20 put together. Yet we are sending our users HERE to this site to vote, where they are exposed to countless FREE opportunities for them to play.

I have no doubt that we double (or more) the traffic that would come here if this site were reserved for free muds only.

We're helping you FAR more than we are harming you.

Second, not all commercial MUDs have the same policies. Some of us our PROUD of the fact that we are a commercial success, and have no problem being explicit that our games are pay to play.

Making us out to all be the same, is about as fair as me thinking that everyone on this board is an immature jerk, because a couple people here don't know how to communicate in a constructive manner.

What we SHOULD be doing here is forming a community of people who would like to improve the overall state of text-based games ... reaching out to those who currently can't see past the graphical games enough to recognize that a text-game is a far greater quality of experience ... and that the brain is the most powerful 3D engine out there.

Frankly, I was highly disappointed when I came to these boards months ago. When I think of all the things we could achieve together, it makes me sad to realize that they will never happen.

Melissa
Producer, GemStone III (who probably shouldn't be posting this.)

[TG_Hammar]

Melissa, what grabbed my attention in your post was the hope that we might be able to form some sort of community support to further the success of text-based games. As a father of 2 boys, I do everything that I can to encourage reading. The fact that most kids today have the attention span of a gnat is understated. I think free MUDs get the attention of the kids just because they are kids and have no funds to upgrade to the p2p gaming. Free MUDs provide an entry level for the younger MUDders, where p2p MUDs create the commercial viability that is required on the 'net for anything to continue for any duration of time. I believe you are correct that most p2p MUDs bring more viewers here with the opportunity to check out free MUDs than any other source, but I still get a creepy feeling with some of these MUDs who use less-than-ethical practices to increase their profit margin a small bit. It appears to me that the more successful a p2p MUD is, the more ethical their advertising and payment practices.

Melissa, I think you should not give up the hope of a MUD community that will band together in the hope to introduce today's youth to text-based gaming. It will happen. The reason is that it does not matter if a MUD is p2p or free, there will always be those who use shortcuts to find their own version of success, just as there is in real life, but there is always those who will put a cause before profit, and I know there are at least a few left out there.

[Mason]

Originally Posted by MelissaMeyer,Jan. 21 2003,175]

Originally Posted by We're helping you FAR more than we are harming you.

While there is no doubt more traffic comes here because of your MUD, there is simply no evidence that it helps any free mud at all.  

Originally Posted by Second, not all commercial MUDs have the same policies.  Some of us our PROUD of the fact that we are a commercial success, and have no problem being explicit that our games are pay to play.

If what people are saying doesn't apply to you then why are you complaining about it?

Originally Posted by Making us out to all be the same, is about as fair as me thinking that everyone on this board is an immature jerk, because a couple people here don't know how to communicate in a constructive manner.

If you can recognize that not everyone is an "immature jerk," why can't you recognize that not everyone makes you all out to be the same?

Originally Posted by What we SHOULD be doing here is forming a community of people who would like to improve the overall state of text-based games ... reaching out to those who currently can't see past the graphical games enough to recognize that a text-game is a far greater quality of experience ... and that the brain is the most powerful 3D engine out there.

I thought we were a community already.  However, I have been informed by p2p adminstrators that this is merely a banner exchange.

Originally Posted by Frankly, I was highly disappointed when I came to these boards months ago.  When I think of all the things we could achieve together, it makes me sad to realize that they will never happen.

And what has prevented you from starting threads that discuss these issues?  Maybe I don't pay as much attention to TMS as I used to, but I can't recall any p2p adminstrator bringing up a such a thread.

Originally Posted by Melissa Producer, GemStone III (who probably shouldn't be posting this

I, too, agree that you shouldn't be posting this hypocrital trite.

[Orion Elder]

Melissa the people you send to these boards are not averse to playing a P2P MUD. Many of them work on a false belief that just because a MUD is a P2P that it MUST be better. I have spoken to a number of people who have stated that since the P2P MUDs took to listing here, the free MUDs have noticed a decline in incoming players. Many of the people who play free MUDs are, however, not prescribed to the bias that just because a MUD is free it must be better. I won't debate whether free or pay is better, as that's just looking to get a flamewar started... I'm merely pointing out the false beliefs many seem to hold.

Now, no one has said P2P MUDs shouldn't list here. If I gave you that impression, I apologize. To be honest, I don't like P2P MUDs advertising using the ranking list, because it takes away one of the few free advertising venues that free MUDs have available to them, however I can tolerate P2P MUDs being on it. What I do NOT want to tolerate is the asinine attempts to grab a few more players by not being upfront and honest about costs.

If you don't want people to repeatedly 'slap you in the face.' You should be upfront (on your ranking list entry) about your MUD being a P2P. But, you don't do that. You, however, do have it listed in your information listing which I must admit is a good bit more than some of the others have done, so my hat's off to you on that point.

So, to recap... P2P not necessarily bad. P2P advertising on one of few free advertising venues around not nice but, not really bad. P2P advertising using underhanded practices on said free venues reason for free MUD supporters to be angry. Hope that helps.

[Yui Unifex]

Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ foo) But, aside from that, the main issue I've seen, and that I take issue with (and I don't even have a MUD listed anymore)... is that these P2P games are essentially stealing advertising. Being a P2P they can afford advertising. Most free MUDs by and large can not afford to go out and pay to advertise a free game.

I don't think it's "stealing" advertising when a game that can afford a banner ad chooses to list their mud in the ranking. How does the ability to pay for something in any way constitute theft when a free alternative is chosen? I don't think it's stealing any more than a free mud listing themselves in a P2P mud's place is stealing.

[Orion Elder]

*sigh* When one 'steals' a base in baseball, does anyone 'own' that base? No, the base is occupied by someone, though. When the runner takes that base it has then been stolen. That is the usage I was intending, and I think it was fairly clear.

This, however, will only serve to deviate the topic of the thread. If you want to take further issue with my usage of the word stealing, feel free to PM me, and we can avoid starting a dictionary flamewar.

[Yui Unifex]

Originally Posted by (Orion Elder @ foo) *sigh* When one 'steals' a base in baseball, does anyone 'own' that base? No, the base is occupied by someone, though. When the runner takes that base it has then been stolen. That is the usage I was intending, and I think it was fairly clear.

Yeah, when I think "stealing" I immediately think baseball... =P

So we understand that the main issue you're concerned with is that P2P muds occupy advertising spaces. But I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say. The second statement of my reply to your post is the question, "How does the ability to pay for something in any way constitute theft when a free alternative is chosen?" I want to know why the ability to pay for something matters in this occupation of the list. Obviously it is important; you did say it was the main issue.

[Orion Elder]

I already covered that. But, to restate it:

Most people who run free MUDs can not AFFORD to pay for advertising, since they already pay for their net connection, most pay for hosting, as well. They do not expect a return from their efforts to provide a free entertainment to people. By taking spots in one of the few free advertising venues provided for MUDding, you are essentially stealing that space from them.

You may not see anything wrong with something that equates to stealing bread from the hungry. I, however, do.