[the_logos]

Originally Posted by Delerak I don't participate in commercial MUD sites. I wasn't even aware that this was a "commercial" mud site. Far as I knew it was a mud listing website, and when I signed up to start using it originally I don't think it even had the advertisements. But I never said I was totally against advertising, I'm not a fanatic like I said before.

It's been a commercial site that runs ads longer than you (or I) have been using it.

I don't like the idea of taking something that started out free and fun, and turning it into a world of warcraft type business.

You're setting up a false dichotomy there insofar as you're implying that free and fun are linked. They are not. I have an awesome time skiing, for instance, and it's certainly not free. Running, on the other hand, costs me no money but I dislike it intensely.

As far as the relationship between how something started and how it is now, I for one am very glad that people are able to unleash their creativity and create something new, which you appear opposed to. If you want something to be exactly like the first instance of it, why wouldn't you be looking only to play/talk about MUD 1? All other MUDs contain different features and are thus not what MUDs originally were. MUD 1 was cool for the time, but by today's standards it is a very, very limited/basic MUD. Thank goodness others took that seed of an idea and expanded upon it, giving us the diverse range of options we have in MUDs today, from the humblest DIKU clone with two players to the WoWs and Runescapes of the world with their millions of players.

It's also worth pointing out that the inventor of MUDs (Dr. Richard Bartle) ran a commercial MUD and that he himself has no problem with commercialization of MUDs.

--matt

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by the_logos It's been a commercial site that runs ads longer than you (or I) have been using it. You're setting up a false dichotomy there insofar as you're implying that free and fun are linked. They are not. I have an awesome time skiing, for instance, and it's certainly not free. Running, on the other hand, costs me no money but I dislike it intensely. As far as the relationship between how something started and how it is now, I for one am very glad that people are able to unleash their creativity and create something new, which you appear opposed to. If you want something to be exactly like the first instance of it, why wouldn't you be looking only to play/talk about MUD 1? All other MUDs contain different features and are thus not what MUDs originally were. MUD 1 was cool for the time, but by today's standards it is a very, very limited/basic MUD. Thank goodness others took that seed of an idea and expanded upon it, giving us the diverse range of options we have in MUDs today, from the humblest DIKU clone with two players to the WoWs and Runescapes of the world with their millions of players. It's also worth pointing out that the inventor of MUDs (Dr. Richard Bartle) ran a commercial MUD and that he himself has no problem with commercialization of MUDs. --matt

This is true, I'm not totally against commercialization to the point of not wanting to buy a game that developers worked hard on and deserve my money. I just don't respect the commercializaiton of anything that takes advantage of the people paying money for it. And I think that's what commercial muds do. I've played commercial muds and have seen the tactics used to get players to continue spending money to play, and anyone with a bit of intelligence wouldn't waste their money.

[Newworlds]

Can we please stay on topic and stop straying off topic to mud bash. I really find that offensive to these forums.

[Saffire]

Originally Posted by Delerak This is true, I'm not totally against commercialization to the point of not wanting to buy a game that developers worked hard on and deserve my money. I just don't respect the commercializaiton of anything that takes advantage of the people paying money for it. And I think that's what commercial muds do. I've played commercial muds and have seen the tactics used to get players to continue spending money to play, and anyone with a bit of intelligence wouldn't waste their money.

But isn't making consumers hand over their money in exchange for the goods or services they offer the goal of pretty much every commercial organization in existence? What do you want the owners of commercial muds to do, start using non-effective stratagies to get players to spend money instead of doing what works, in the hopes that people such as yourself will sleep easy knowing that random people you've never met and likely will never meet in the future aren't being taken advantage of? They'll just be taken advantage of by some other company anyways (Have you seen the price of gas these days? Now that is what I would call being taken advantage of).

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Saffire But isn't making consumers hand over their money in exchange for the goods or services they offer the goal of pretty much every commercial organization in existence? What do you want the owners of commercial muds to do, start using non-effective stratagies to get players to spend money instead of doing what works, in the hopes that people such as yourself will sleep easy knowing that random people you've never met and likely will never meet in the future aren't being taken advantage of? They'll just be taken advantage of by some other company anyways (Have you seen the price of gas these days? Now that is what I would call being taken advantage of).

Of course, I don't care about commercial organizations in general, it's just muds trying to profit from the mudding community. It just doesn't feel right. If everyone felt the same way about it, we wouldn't have had the great codebases and community we have today.

Open source is the way to go. Could you imagine if linux wasn't free? Or if DIKU decided not to release it's code with their license. We wouldn't have many great muds in existance that are on the top of the mudlists you see at this website everyday.

[ShadowsDawn]

Originally Posted by Delerak Of course, I don't care about commercial organizations in general, it's just muds trying to profit from the mudding community. It just doesn't feel right. If everyone felt the same way about it, we wouldn't have had the great codebases and community we have today. Open source is the way to go. Could you imagine if linux wasn't free? Or if DIKU decided not to release it's code with their license. We wouldn't have many great muds in existance that are on the top of the mudlists you see at this website everyday.

Yes linux is free, but how many commercial releases of it do we see? Can anyone say SuSE.. RedHat...? Both of these either still produce or used to produce 'commercial' versions of their linux bundles. There are other commercial distros, but those are the ones that come to me off the top of my head, as I have had those.. actually have the first commercial release of linux that RedHat ever made.. ahh the headaches that thing caused. Wine is a freely available program, yet there are commercial version of it that have been specialized to handle certain things (Cedega.. Crossover Office). Should any of these be looked down on? No, far from it. They have worked hard to make Wine more useful for certain situations, and sometimes have even gotten licenses to the things they have added into the code (thus meaning they can't release those portions).

Open Source does not mean the software is free. Open Source is about providing the source code for the software freely. Now, by that I mean if you get the program (whether the program is free or you pay for it) you then should have access to the source code, if it is not already bundled with it. Yes a lot of Open Source programs are free, but a program that costs money can still be open source software. Open Source is about providing people with access to be able to see how the program they just got works, or even be able to make alterations to customize it to their specific needs, fixing bugs and the like, hopefully passing bug fixes up to the creators, and even redistributing their version of it. Open Source and the Free Software Foundation (which is slightly different fom Open Source) have nothing to do with the programs being free.

Diku is not Free software. It's not even really and truly Open Source. Yes, it costs you nothing to use, or even publish a game with it. But in order for a piece of software to be Free or truly Open Source, you have to have the freedom to do with it whatever you wish (pretty much don't break the law), including being able to sell your version of the modified software if you chose. Linux, on the other hand *is* Free and Open Source software since companies can take it, create their own distro using other Free or Open Source software, and turn around and sell the thing after they have it packaged how they want.

As for MUDs who are 'commercial'... You yourself have said that you do not mind paying a game developer for their hard work. Are MUD developers not game developers? Do they not put a lot of hard work and love into their projects? There is nothing wrong with those who put in the work to build their game from the ground up (or using a piece of Free software as a base) to seek a bit of payment for the game they have developed for others to play.

There are three groups that I can think offhand of that create pay-to-play MUDs. Play.net with their round of game, Iron Realms with theirs, and Frogdice (Creators of Threshold and soon Primordiax). Do I agree with everything these groups do for their games, nope. Do I think that they take advantage of the mudding community... only ones I can say yes to without a doubt there, is Play.net. $15/mo is a steep price for a text based game. However, I respect their right to do so. Gemstone has a long history, and as far as I know it has always been a commercial project.

Iron Realms.. I find their games to be quite well made, and I do enjoy firing up Lusternia or Aetolia and having my fun for a little while. I do not fault them for seeking to make some money off the games. As far as their payment method goes, yes the game is 'free to play', and you can get credits in game. However, you do need credits to be able to advance your character very far in the skill trees, and getting them through the in game credit market.. you'd need to spend hundreds of hours getting the gold to buy the credits to get your skills to high levels.

Frogdice, Threshold specifically, yup, that has been my 'home' MUD for years. There are some things I don't like about the game (mainly would love it to be more viable to advance characters without having to go out and kill stuff), but it is still well made. Granted there has been a lot of debate in the past about the game and it being a commercial game, and I'm not interested in getting into that discussion. My point is, the game has been well made, and the roleplaying in it is better than any other commercial game I have seen yet. I do feel that some of the 'perks' you can purchase should be available to all characters, but hey, that is their choice on how to handle it.

In short, charging money to play a MUD is not taking advantage of anyone. It is not going against the notion of Open Source or Free Software. Also, most MUD code bases do not fall under actual Free or Open Software. Cost may be free.. but they are not Free or Open.

Edit: Note about the games I mentioned that are commercial, and I mentioned things I didn't particularly like, they are just my personal opinions. It doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the game or the method they choose to make money. How they handle it is their choice, and right. If I don't like it, it is my choice whether or not I play there or give them my money. That right there is actually one incentive that commercial MUDs have to create a well made and entertaining game, if players don't like it, it's too buggy, or what ahve you, those players can easily take their money elsewhere.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by Delerak Of course, I don't care about commercial organizations in general, it's just muds trying to profit from the mudding community.

Really? One page back you wrote, "I'm also against capitalism and commercialization though so go figure.


Backpedaling is fun isn't it?

It just doesn't feel right. If everyone felt the same way about it, we wouldn't have had the great codebases and community we have today.

And if we didn't have commercial text MUDs the most popular text MUDs in history would not have existed. The most popular text MUDs today are also commercial. The text MUD community loves commercial MUDs, as evidenced by those facts. You may not like them, and some other developers may not, but actions speak, and the text MUD community's actions say it's happy to support commercial MUDs.

Open source is the way to go. Could you imagine if linux wasn't free? Or if DIKU decided not to release it's code with their license.

I think another poster has already pointed out that you don't seem to understand what open source is. DIKU is certainly not open source.

We wouldn't have many great muds in existance that are on the top of the mudlists you see at this website everyday.

Likewise, without commercial MUDs we wouldn't have many of the great muds in existence that are on top of the mudlists you see at this website every day. I wouldn't typically use any "top mud list" as justification for anything but you brought it up. Fully half of the top 10 MUDs here are commercial, and at least one other accepts money (Aardwolf, which isn't really fully commercial but does accept money sometimes).

And that's not even counting Gemstone and Dragonrealms (both commercial), which would be at the top of the TMS list if they participated in the voting actively.

The idea that one feature set of MUDs is "more right" than another is silly. Subscription charges, pay-for-virtual-item features, etc are just features, no different from having a weather system or a combat system .

--matt

[Spoke]

Delerak has made it clear that his is just an opinion, within the thread it counts just a "Why he would not play a MUD", he went a bit further and threw some flame-bait in his first post, has changed his argument as the fallacy of his initial words was pointed out and now is helping convert the thread into another "Commercial MUDs are evil, play RPIs as I define them!" thread.

Could we all just be aware of his intentions on derailing a perfectly fine thread into oblivion and let him just fade away into nothingness? If you know you are so absolutely right and he (Delerak) is so absolutely wrong (which for my standards has been 'proven' with arguments already) then just let it be. Others will come to the same conclusion and maybe have a good laugh at his arguments for not playing the MUDs he listed.

Let the thread return to its original intent please, it was a fine thread, it was a good thread ...

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Spoke Delerak has made it clear that his is just an opinion, within the thread it counts just a "Why he would not play a MUD", he went a bit further and threw some flame-bait in his first post, has changed his argument as the fallacy of his initial words was pointed out and now is helping convert the thread into another "Commercial MUDs are evil, play RPIs as I define them!" thread. Could we all just be aware of his intentions on derailing a perfectly fine thread into oblivion and let him just fade away into nothingness? If you know you are so absolutely right and he (Delerak) is so absolutely wrong (which for my standards has been 'proven' with arguments already) then just let it be. Others will come to the same conclusion and maybe have a good laugh at his arguments for not playing the MUDs he listed. Let the thread return to its original intent please, it was a fine thread, it was a good thread ...

I totally agree.

[Zeta Thompson]

Originally Posted by CSmith_Fan I think also..if you check out... the player reviews for the MUD and, for example, out of the 10 reviews, ONE is an actual players and the rest are all Staff..red flags go up.

Other review flags for me:

Only Glowing reviews that sound similar. THis makes me wonder did the Admin write something and offer bonuses or favor for posting a good review? I question the credibility of the MUD if every single review has no bad points mentions and hit the same exact high points.

Admin 'answers' every review that contains a negative comment. For me a review should have pros and cons, although there are a few muds I have been on for which I could find nothing good to say except it is running - most of the time. Yet, time and time again I have seen admins (mainly on TMC) comment on a review in detail even to the point of revealing the reviewer's character names and their transgressions on the MUD. Sorry I just don't think comments like , "I found the roleplay contrived," or "There are too many unfinished areas or commands that do not function" warrant that.

Reviews are all a few days or hours apart. Again that smacks of a reward being offered. Now admittedly we will all as players occasdionally say hey such and such a mud site has nothing on this place in its reviews. But after an initail flurry, others should follow periodically.

[Disillusionist]

Originally Posted by Zeta Thompson Other review flags for me: ... Admin 'answers' every review that contains a negative comment. For me a review should have pros and cons, although there are a few muds I have been on for which I could find nothing good to say except it is running - most of the time.

Agreed, and I expand my suspicion to the same behavior in player reviews, especially those that attack the poster of a negative review, rather than comment on the review itself.

[Milawe]

While this is not something that would make me quit outright, it does annoy me enough to often make me log out. I really hate when I ask a legitimate question on a help channel or on a forum, and I get some un-helpful but funny (at least to the person who posted, I guess) answer. Then my question gets derailed into bantering back and forth while I never get an answer. I really didn't ask a question, so I could be subjected to a subpar comedy routine.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by Milawe While this is not something that would make me quit outright, it does annoy me enough to often make me log out. I really hate when I ask a legitimate question on a help channel or on a forum, and I get some un-helpful but funny (at least to the person who posted, I guess) answer. Then my question gets derailed into bantering back and forth while I never get an answer. I really didn't ask a question, so I could be subjected to a subpar comedy routine.

This one is huge for me on forums. I can't stand when people derail a serious thread. I derail stupid threads on purpose but I don't think I ever purposefully derailed a serious thread.

[Saffire]

I don't play any MUD that runs on an open-source codebase (Aside from a couple of modified beyond recognition LP Muds). Other than that, I'll give anything a chance.

[Tenebrae]

Okay. I've been playing the MUD I play for four years, put a lot of time and effort in to both game and characters, made a brilliant lot of rp-buddies. But I'm about to abandon ship (for which I have an odd seperation anxiety, anyone else get that?) despite my loyalty to the game's community, because it's to the point where the things that get up my nose outweigh (or heavily put a damper on) the fun I'm having. So (deep breath) here goes:

1: Constant and intrusive admin plots.

Do we really NEED to be told what and when to rp, or have to face yet --another-- war/disease/national crisis/invasion every other week? I'd really prefer admin to bugger off, and let us create in-game tensions for ourselves. The ones we do build hardly get time to buid momentum before they're interrupted (and a deal of rp is simply wasted). Once or twice, fine-- as a standard practice? Nah.

2: Inconsistent/invisible/pulled-out-of-ass rules and policy/gameplay changes.

For example, it makes me head-desk violently when a race's essential characteristics are changed overnight and with little warning (really, set them the hell up properly to start?), and moreso when this happens a lot.

Also, rules that give admin free reign to act like player-hating assholes, as long as you've minutely trangressed some rule or other. Rules that are not written. Rules that absolve admin from all blame, ever. Rules that allow admin to decide severity of punishments based on thier own levels of like/dislike for the player.

Being punished for minute transgressions by being put in a punishment-room for what could be weeks, with no visible date of release, and no way of knowing how long you're in there, and making it illegal to try and find out.

3: Player-is-the-enemy admin mentality.

The assumption that everyone but the folks who suck up hard or passively drift along ingame are there to cause trouble, or be an inconvenience to the coders/rp admin/status quo, and being treated that way.

4: Having rp vetoed without explanation/waiting interminable periods for rp approval.

Seriously, it is NOT OK to say "no" and leave it at that, or to leave players hanging two to ten weeks waiting for rp/rooms/items to be approved. Momentum is lost, player interest wanes, the iron grows cold -- and so does my interest in staying there.

It is REALLY not OK to rip ideas from players, then use them-- after turning down the player's rp w/o explanation or suggestions for improvement.

5: Stupidly-placed, over-aggressive mobs.

Yeah, putting masses of aggressive, hit-for-a-bajillion mobs on every main thoroughfare so that newbs/low stat players have trouble exploring and roleplaying (without a hugely pricey/rare protective item) is a really great idea. If you don't like players.

6: Badly/irregularly managed OOC channels.

If a game MUST have an ooc channel, it should have consistent rules and calm moderation, or at least some firm policy on what can happen there. Swinging between utterly draconian/lax to the point of nil moderation only creates resentment and confusion.


.... so, there's like points 7 though 50 but that's all I have the energy to type. For now.

except 7: Admin characters who are immortal/uber powerful/unkillable and that rule whole nations forever, and the admin behind them refusing to acknowledge any rp that challenges the status quo.

and 8: Having ONE admin responsible for approving major stuff and whose word is final, so can say no on a whim even though the rest ofstaff are supportive of the concept.

9: And having too few staff, with not enough responsiblity delegated so things get backlogged horribly.

And one more:

Telnet games (which I play now and then) -- newbie-coddling is a good thing. For those not used to all that code, an in-game newb area that's super-kind and also interesting to play/not ooc really helps new-to-telnet folks not feel like such scaredy morons, and therefore less likely to run away.

k. I'm done.

[Jazuela]

What do you mean by Telnet games? If you mean "games that can be played via telnet" then most text-based muds fall under that category. There are very very VERY few text-based games that are -only- available via browsers or -only- available via their own unique front end game client. And, most of those game-client-specific games can have a work-around to access via telnet anyway.

[Tenebrae]

Yups, I've been playing some of those very, very, very few browser-only games. I think there's... five or six, all told, up and running. If they can be loaded by telnet, I don't know anyone who does. It's the format I learned to rp with, so that's what I know, mainly, and I do like it very much. The coding is far simpler and rp fills in the gaps (or is supposed to, I haven't found one coded or run in any way satisfactory to me, even though I like the format too much too abandon it). I am hoping to build a better, faster, stronger one, but that's what they all say I suppose, lol. Still, worth a shot-- there's a number of players who do enjoy that style of game.

[Throttle]

I'm extremely picky with my muds so I've only played a handful for any significant length of time. Beyond the things that I'm personally nitpicky about, here are some main factors that will deter me from a non-RPI mud, in no particular order:


- Annoying playerbase. Can be anything from immaturity to cliquish behaviour and newbie hostility; if the playerbase doesn't consist mainly of the kind of people I'd associate with in real life, I won't play there. There's enough of that in real life for me to want it in my hobby as well.

- Poorly written game world. I want immersion; it doesn't have to be on the level of RPI muds where everything has to be perfect and greatly eloquent, but if the descriptions and NPCs aren't written in a serious and consistent manner, I can't take the game seriously. When writing a room or an NPC's description, write what it looks like. When writing an object, put more effort into the description than "this sword glows and it's really sharp."

- Lack of theme. I refuse to play on a mud that consists of a mainly stock version of Midgard, with a smurf town down the road and a Disney amusement park over the hill. As much as I admire many aspects of muds like Aardwolf, I cringe at the thought of playing in an environment that is randomly slapped together with no reason or realism whatsoever. Likewise, some sort of coherent lore would be nice.

- Ridiculous ANSI and combat echoes. I like it modest and I like it customizable. Give me default client color for all but room names, PCs/NPCs, items and communication, and I'll be happy as a clam. I also don't need to <+<+<+<DeVaStAtE>+>+>+> anyone with my [*[*[-Slash of Godlike Überness-]*]*]. I like my muds tasteful and plain in that regard.

- Race and class choices. Please don't give me thirty of each. It makes the game unfathomable and takes forever to learn, and most of the time there's only a handful that are worth playing anyway. I am more than happy with half a dozen races and classes, maybe with some subclasses I can pick and choose from later on when I've actually learned the game. I'd also much rather play an elf or a dwarf than a zcuflz'kraxx or a bluzütskræ demon. Warriors and clerics over heretic half-dragon deathknights from the seventh layer of Hell.

- Lack of nice pace and reasonable goals. I don't need to get a level every five minutes to stay interested, and what does it matter when the maximum level is 1500 anyway? You know what's the absolute main selling point of most games? That sense of achievement that we get when we accomplish something, the sweet rush of joy we had in Everquest after spending half a day getting a level. You take that away when you have me level up every few kills, and you cheapen the goal when there's another thousand levels ahead of me, each one interchangable and without any noticeable difference. I prefer a maximum level somewhere around 50, and I don't mind spending four or more hours getting each level if I can feel the improvements when I do. Also, please do not build your mud so that there is no end goal in sight. If I know that I'll never cap out and never reach the end of the road, there's no goal to motivate me and I know I'll never be among the best. Such muds tend to favor whoever has played the longest and completely leaves out the more casual players.

- Unfair equipment schemes. I want it to be challenging to get the best, but I don't want the next best to be useless. Build your game to be fair to those who can't or won't struggle to remain among the top. Casual players shouldn't expect to become the best, but they deserve the possibility of achieving competence. Give those who can play for 8-12 hours a day an advantage, but don't give them utter dominance and automatic victory if it's a PvP mud. Also, I prefer that the equipment increments are tastefully done and don't end up with weapons that are 25d300 +75/+75 - don't go the Everquest route of mudflating your game to death.

- No pay-to-play, pay-for-perks, donate-for-stats or bribe-for-advantages of any kind whatsoever. It never leads to anything good except for whoever gets paid. I do not want to involve my RL economy in any way other than possible donations for nothing other than my appreciation of the mud. I don't mind cafepress stores, but leave it the heck out of the game itself.