Edit Your Preferences
users can post new topics and replies to this forum
HTML is: Off
BBcode is: On
[quote] On 01-08-2008 15:23, ewarwoowar wrote: Well put gobstopper. As a recent newcomer to mud2, I found mudii purely by chance (I was looking to play British Legends again and went foraging around the site), and had to make a choice as to whether to sign up for mud2.com or mudii.co.uk (although I guess, as they are both free, there's nothing stopping me from joining both, but fail to see the benefit of doing so). For me the decision was based mainly on the domain name (i.e. .co.uk indicated to me that this was a uk-based mud whereas .com gave me the impression it was a US-based mud) as I wanted to ensure that there would be players around at the times that I would most likely play. However, before making the choice, I also went through various pages of both websites and, as gobstopper said, felt that mudii was more 'up to date' or at least more active more recently. I have assumed that mud2.com is running the same version of MUD2 as mudii.co.uk, and so the thought of the player base being diluted had occurred to me too, and could be counter-productive for the game - or at least for one of the sites. I heard a sales mantra a long time ago that said 'choices cause confusion' and, where there is very little to decide between two choices, this can cause the most dithering...and most people simply make the third choice, i.e. choose not to choose and go elsewhere. I think it would be nice to have more players around, but imagine that it would depend largely on the timezone that players are in as to whether or not there were actually any more on at the same time as me. Having more players might mean that this website (and those it links to) attracts more activity (although this won't necessarily be so). An inactive or seldom updated website gives the impression of a dead or dying site and tends to dissuade visitors from exploring too much further. Having more players - and hence more activity (perhaps!) - might even persuade more visitors to have a go a playing or, if they have played a game or two, perhaps for them to stay. Is the in-game culture so very different between the two sites? I can't answer that as I haven't played on mud2.com, but my gut feeling says 'no' (said bullying/harrassing aside). Is there still a NEED for two versions to be running? I know that historically we had British Legends which was run by Viktor as free-to-play vs MUD2 run by MUSE (and later by WirePlay), but I was quite surprised to find two free versions. I like it here. And I'm sure that many (most?) on mud2.com would say the same. I would support a merging of the player base, so long as the players and characters I've started to get to know here were present in the merged game/site because, for me, they ARE the game. MUD2 is a great adventure, but an empty Land is not worth visiting very often.
[ This Message was edited by: ewarwoowar on 01-08-2008 16:26 ]
on this Post
on this Post
(This can be altered or added in your profile)
These forums may be read by anyone, but only registered mudII.co.uk
players may post. When posting, please refrain from behaviour
not tolerated in the game.
These forums are moderated.
Copyright © 2000 - 2001
The phpBB Group
phpBB Created this page in 0.004060 seconds.