[the_logos]

This is for that fringe minority who spends most of their time on the boards flaming people, and specifically Iron Realms. Instead of taking so many threads off-topic by turning them into flamefests, go ahead and vent your vitriol here. You'll probably sleep better at night and won't be so grumpy when awake.

--matt

[Sacac]

Some of them are scared that 10% ruin it for the rest of them. They seem to think Iron Realms is that so called 10%.

[WarHound]

I'm on the other side of the fence on the whole 'We're Free!' "NO YOU AREN'T!" fence from the logos, but I'm agreeing with him here. Damn it all. Defending HIM! ...

But, it's gotten rather pathetic when -any- post he makes is spun out of control into a 'YOU ****ING SUCK!' thread. Get over it, guys. I haven't heard a new, valid argument in this discussion in months, and frankly I'm tired of it. So tired I rarely rock these forums anymore.

So, instead of sitting around, rehashing the -same- arguments a thousand times, why don't you use that time to better your own mud, and in doing so make off like bandits with his players?

Meh. I like these forums and the discussion that used to go on here, but it seems like every time I click on a link, I see one post by the logos followed by a dozen whiners, coming out of the woodwork to **** and moan about the same #### from the last twenty threads.

Yes. IRE blows hard, but so does everywhere else. Which is sadder? The fact that the logos and his company sucks so much, or the fact that you suck so much you have nothing to do but bitch about them?

Stop bitching, and spend this time playing Age of Reptiles. Or burning yourself with cigarettes. Both are far more productive.

[DonathinFrye]

If you don't like our criticism of your topics, choose your phraseologies more carefully, Matt. And anyone who thinks that Iron Realms is anywhere close to the majority of the community here... well, I am very very sorry for you. : p

Back to posting on other threads, though.

[Zion-Altari]

I'm just going to put in my 2 cents here, and see what happens...

First of all, I'm not a great fan of IRE, but then again, i'm a picky mudder... I've played pretty much every mud thats made it up to the top 20 in the last year or so, and havn't liked many of them at all. But in my mind at least, any mud that constantly makes the top 5 every month running for who knows how long must have something going for it at least.

Now, as for all this free versus paying debate... I'm going to stand with Matt on this one, all IRE muds are FREE TO PLAY. No where in the muds is there a point at all which you MUST pay money. His topic about new payment options was purely an optional service provide faster advancement for player skills, by buying credits. Nowhere does it say that a player MUST purchase these credits to play the mud, thus making it a FREE TO PLAY mud.

Now, I don't know anything about these aleged threats or anything, but for the moment, for all i don't particularly like Iron Realms Entertainmets muds myself, my support is behind Matt for this.

Farewell,

Midnight Zion, Eternal Shadow

[Aarn]

Originally Posted by I'm going to stand with Matt on this one, all IRE muds are FREE TO PLAY

So to recap, in IREs model you can log on for free but will be facing people who have paid money to get ahead, and will be solicited for such a payment yourself.

In the model for a game like Carrion Fields, you can log on for free and never even have the option to pay anything, anywhere, nor will you ever be up against anyone who has gotten ahead by means of their wallet.

How would you suggest aknowledging this distinct difference between the two models, if both are allowed to simply call themselves "free"? Recognizing that there is limited space in an advertisement, so drawn-out explanations aren't practical.

[Traveler]

As has been stated by Matt's own admins in the forums of his games he likes to argue. I suspect this thread serves no purpose other then to provide Matt a bit of entertainment.

[lovechiefs]

As a IRE customer,playing all four of their MUDs(especially Achaea),I would like to say that all of their MUDs are free to play.If a player chooses to spend money for credits,that is his choice.
Personnaly I bought credits only once(for achaea) and I would do it again if I had the money(I am a college student).But this is besides the point.
My point is that IRE games are great and free to play.
As far as the flaming,let me also add my two cents to it.
I haven't been a member of the TMC for very long,however everytime IRE is posting a news or something,there is always a guy from Carrion Fields that starts to attack IRE.
And to be completely honest,I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THAT!!!
And as I see Carrion Fields to be the culprit as far as flaming goes,I am done even remotely trying to play Carrion Fields
GO IRE!!!!!

[Lisaera]

There's nothing wrong with Iron Realms, it's Matt that sucks.

I'm so getting fired.

[The_Disciple]

Originally Posted by (lovechiefs @ Mar. 16 2006,11:16) As a IRE customer,playing all four of their MUDs(especially Achaea),I would like to say that all of their MUDs are free to play.If a player chooses to spend money for credits,that is his choice. Personnaly I bought credits only once(for achaea) and I would do it again if I had the money(I am a college student).But this is besides the point. My point is that IRE games are great and free to play. As far as the flaming,let me also add my two cents to it. I haven't been a member of the TMC for very long,however everytime IRE is posting a news or something,there is always a guy from Carrion Fields that starts to attack IRE. And to be completely honest,I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THAT!!! And as I see Carrion Fields to be the culprit as far as flaming goes,I am done even remotely trying to play Carrion Fields GO IRE!!!!!

I dunno, I'm not sure pointing out that a free MUD has extra payment options is really an attack. It's just one of those funny things, like jumbo shrimp or fighting for peace.

[Spoke]

Originally Posted by (Aarn @ Mar. 16 2006,09<!--emo&[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img])] Originally Posted by I'm going to stand with Matt on this one, all IRE muds are FREE TO PLAY So to recap, in IREs model you can log on for free but will be facing people who have paid money to get ahead, and will be solicited for such a payment yourself.* In the model for a game like Carrion Fields, you can log on for free and never even have the option to pay anything, anywhere, nor will you ever be up against anyone who has gotten ahead by means of their wallet. Missing text?** How would you suggest aknowledging this distinct difference between the two models, if both are allowed to simply call themselves "free"? Recognizing that there is limited space in an advertisement, so drawn-out explanations aren't practical.

In your donations webpage, it is specifically said that

Originally Posted by However, from time to time we have had to solicit our players to help us fund the costs of running the systems required to maintain our Internet presence.

Now, this is clearly different from MUDs that are trully 100% free to play and do not contain any solicitation for money from the staff, is not it?

Further down your site's page we find

Originally Posted by Only a portion of the PayPal shipping and handling fee is to cover the cost of the transaction and is taken out of your donation, so we just get a little less. The more you can donate at once, the smaller the fee, but any little bit helps! $100 donation has $3.20 fee (net $96.80) $25 donation has $1.03 fee (net $23.97) $5 donation has $0.50 fee (net $4.50)

,

which could be read as, eventhough every bit helps, you should donate larger amounts of money to us. (I guess this is a valid way to read, as much as free-to-play can be read as free-to-obtain-everything-that-everybody-else-gets-even-if-they-bought-things -with-rl-money).

At the end, comercial and non-comercial ventures require money to be run. There are different models for both and it has been said before that the problem is not with labeling two different models differently, but with doing so in an inaccurate way that would harm either of the two ends. The problem is that if you want to be accurate, you cannot do it with simply the addition of a couple check-boxes, furthermore, only the MUDs in the first page (if even those) will be policed for accurateness of their description, which would mean much more annoyance to the list owner. I believe Matt has said a couple of times that he would be willing to add a full description of their economical model, but he was behemently against new labels that would send the wrong message to the potential players of his MUDs.

On top of this, if it is true that the great majority of the comunity does not really care about MUDs where you can pay to advance or get perks, then it would make much more sense that this same comunity had discussions on Role-playing, H&S design, combat styles, etc. The reality is that except for a couple of people (not more than a handful), like Brody and now and then KaViR, nothing is discussed about any of these, much more important, subjects. So, what we have here is just a concern for having someone else using my words, in a way that is accepted by most people (not the posters of these threads though) in everyday life (Go to a Publix supermarket if you live in the US and check how many 'Buy-One-get-One-free' you find).

Lastly, I believe someone had mentioned that Matt had only supporters among his staff or players. I am none of those, and I believe I even have had priv-messages exchanged before with the person making this claim, explaining this was so. This is not only a poor way to try to undermine arguments but a clear way to show that even with knowledge of a fact people choose to hide it if it would serve their purposes to attack someone else.

Have a good day

* bold-italic added by me.
** bold-italic text added by me.

[Maelgrim]

IRE games are not my primary mud. I play them for a change of scenery. However, I think I have enough experience in them to make the following conclusion. Here is the advantage that payers have over non-payers.

Players who pay do not have to worry about extensively inactive characters being deleted, so long as that specific character has purchased credits.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is it. I have seen non-payers whack arti-whores before, no doubt I'll see it again. Skill is still the primary deciding factor in IRE fights. (Idiot examples like a 20+ level disadvantage nonwithstanding, please, let's all operate with the brains god granted a tapeworm, shall we?)

Probably why the whiners are so vehement. They can't hack the fact that they (IRE games) actually require a little more forethought and planning than that stacked three command macro that serves them so well in their smaug favourites. So it must be the fact that that other person is being favoured for paying! ZOMG! UNFAIR! NERF!

I hate whiners.

[tehScarecrow]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ Mar. 15 2006,23:45) This is for that fringe minority who spends most of their time on the boards flaming people, and specifically Iron Realms. Instead of taking so many threads off-topic by turning them into flamefests, go ahead and vent your vitriol here. You'll probably sleep better at night and won't be so grumpy when awake. --matt

Vitriol, that gives you disloyalty affliction in Imperian right?

[FenringThalion]

Been playing Aetolia for a little over 3 years now. I'm not one of the movers and shakers in the realm, but I enjoy a small measure of recognition in the world. Guess that puts me on the pro-IRE side.

I greatly enjoy IRE games, and I can't see how anyone would say that they "suck", honestly, as even if you dislike them it's quite obvious they're head and shoulders above most other mp roleplaying games out there, including graphical MMOs.

Not to say I think Rapture is holy or that I have a shrine to Matt at my house or anything. Honestly if I was to write a MUD engine I'd do things quite different from the way Rapture is, in particular I've always been rather irritated at how the combat is almost entirely based upon the affliction -> cure system, I find it a pain to deal with and easily turned to the benefit of people who concentrate more on game mechanics than on actual roleplay. Mob bashing is quite dismal in my opinion as well.

Of a much lower irritation factor to me is the fact that I would really like to see a really top-notch sci-fi MUD, all the other choices out there are simply dreadful. IRE should be the company to blow the lid off SF MUDding, but they're continually putting out medieval-fantasy type games.

Having noted all these things that irritate me, I will note that I do intend to continue to play Aetolia and that overall I find that IRE is a notch above the other choices out there. Before I found Aetolia I couldn't find a MUD that would hold my attention for any length of time. That's saying something there.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by There's nothing wrong with Iron Realms, it's Matt that sucks. I'm so getting fired.

She's sort of right, though - I actually like Lusternia and most of its admins seem agreeable and interested in creative design. People's problems with IRE really due typically stem from Matt himself.

[prof1515]

I'm not one of Carrion Fields' staff nor do I play it (though, like the IRE games, I've tried it). And I myself find Matt's description of his games as deceitful.  I also find Matt's tone toward other MUDs to be disrespectful and conceited and having tried his MUDs, he doesn't have any grounds to be conceited.  I've played over 850 MUDs and while the IRE games probably end up ranked in the top 10% of them, that's only because the bar is so low.  Compared to the best MUDs I've found, IRE's games aren't that impressive.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is the dishonest way in which they advertise their games (kudos to Lusternia for not advertising itself as "free to play" like the other three do) and the way in which Matt attacks anyone that he feels threatens his little business.

I was first drawn to read the forums when a Matt started his attack on other MUDs over "IP theft" using Shadows of Isildur as his example.  While he claimed righteous motives, I suspected from the tone of his posts as well as his targets that he was more motivated by the fact that a new (and genuinely free) Tolkien-based MUD was doing quite well in the rankings at a time when interest in Tolkien was high due to the cinematic release of the LOTR films.  This was something IRE games couldn't do:  use a theme like LOTR because a commercial company, as opposed to a free game created out of love of the theme and the medium, IRE'd have to pay for the use of the name/theme.  Matt knew lots of MUDs do it and never had a problem with it.  But suddenly, IP theft became an issue for Matt and his attacks began.  He felt both jealous and threatened, the latter of which he's displayed repeatedly since then toward anything he perceives as hurting his selfish attempts at manipulation of TMS.

All the while, he continues to pretend he's somehow a representative of the community and a "professional" while those he attacks are "hobbyists" and thus not equals or important.  And when he fears that those who actually think about the MUD community above their own interests make suggestions for changes that he perceives might harm his own selfish interests, he lashes out at them as "hobbyists", "the minority", and threatens to use economic leverage against the site admins.  He'll take his ball and go home if everyone can't play by his rules.  And that's why I don't like him.  He's a lying, selfish, conceited, no-talent ass.

And maybe he should take his ball and go home.  So I'll make the offer right  now.  How much does IRE pay in advertising to this site per year?  I'll match it if honesty in advertising is required (ie, Viagra MUDs have to be honest about what they are:  pay-to-succeed) in the listings.  If Matt throws a hissy-fit and pulls IRE's advertising dollars from TMS, it's no big loss for the site (and certainly not for the MUDding community) as they'll still get their money (even though my MUD won't be anywhere near ready for years).  But maybe it's just time to call his bluff.

Take care,

Jason

[the_logos]

So in other words, you'd like to bribe Adam in order to make changes to the site that fit your own desires, right?

Funny. That's just what I'm being accused of, albeit without any evidence. Oh, the irony.

--matt

[DonathinFrye]