|
I disagree strongly with this statement. Many "hobbyist" MUDs, us included, have multiple active administrators. Even if one (or a few) admins suddenly feel the MUD is a low priority, it does not have a direct impact on the game because other admins can easily fill the gap.
On many (but not all) professional MUDs, there is one or a couple of paid administrators, and then a bunch of volunteer staff (who may receive some benefits for "volunteering"). In these scenarios, should one of the paid admins leave (vacations, lucrative job offers etc), it will have a much bigger impact on the game than in the hobbyist scenario. Most of the "professional" MUDs have a quite limited budget, so it's not possible for them to keep half a dozen or more of paid staff that could then be elevated into administrators. I would also argue that just because someone has a financial interest in a game (maybe with the exception of games that has seen a truly significant investment budget prior to launch), "professional" MUDs are more prone to being shut down (or replaced with another game) if the administrator realizes he is no longer earning enough from the game.
The case for stability in professional MUDs versus hobbyist MUDs mainly applies to hobbyist games with a single implementor. There are risks in both models, but since the admin of a professional MUD is financially dependant on the game, he/she is more likely to terminate (or make significant modifications) in the project, should the businessmodel start failing.
|