Member Discussions

Hey There,

I've been developing a MUD for the past *FOUR YEARS*. We've got a lot of features under the hood already, but the biggest problem we've always struggled with has been builder activity and getting people to complete their areas.

To combat that problem, we began making builders complete unfinished areas before giving them their own area to start from scratch. This seems to have worked wonderfully.

During the time we had few to no active builders, we had an active coder who did a lot of work for new features under the hood. We're running a highly modified RoT.

Unfortunately, shortly before we got some really nice activity going, our coder had his work life erupt into chaos and has since been unable to make the time to wrap up the last bit of coding needed to get us open.

We've hired several coders since who agree to take the job and then do nothing, or are novice coders and lack the experience to make any effective changes. Our builder activity has begun to suffer as a result of this coding stagnation.

I have now compromised on the things I wanted to put in before opening to the point that all we need to install are some new skills/spells. I haven't compromised to the point that I don't feel this is worth opening, but I have compromised. The reason? I feel that once we've opened for Beta testing, we will have a MUCH easier time finding dedicated staff who will want to help.

There is, however, the concern over a few open but unfinished areas and how this will impact player reviews - even though we are looking at only opening to Beta testing. This is a sentiment from our Head Builder. She feels that we shouldn't rush things.

My line of thinking is that, if we are open for Beta testing people will be more eager to volunteer their help, as they will see their work being used more quickly - and there will be more activity on the mud, which will in turn encourage them to be more active, as well.

Frankly, it has been a very long and difficult road to get to this point. But even so, I'd hate to open up for Beta Testing and have it backfire on us.

So, my question is this: If you were in my shoes, would you open for Beta testing with some unfinished areas, any way? Or would you wait, with builder activity flagging, until you had all the necessary areas completed?

All advice is welcomed. Thanks. :)

This might give you some insight:

http://www.mudconnect.com/discuss/discuss.cgi?mode=MSG&area=new_admin&message=8952

As far as our MUD, we've been in steady development for the past 3 years straight, with sporadic development for many years prior...

The approach I took was to be "open" for anyone who wanted to come play or build or whatever, but to make it clear to anyone logging in that we are not, in fact, an open game, and to expect instability, unfinished areas, changes to classes, races, and other systems. We haven't listed yet, and have gained our entire staff and playerbase through word of mouth and advertising for testers/staff on TMC.

While the areas certainly come along slower than what we'd like, they are coming along and we've accomplished a ton in the last 3 years. I find everyone stays more motivated and logs in more if there is some player activity and feedback, so I think that's very important for even an unopened or unfinished game.

What I plan on doing is waiting until we're ready to officially open before we actually list our game, because new listings tend to attract more attention than an older listing updated that the game is now open/finished.

I would say open for Beta, but as Hades Kane said above, be fair to your players by informing them of the game state, what they might expect and trying to keep the changes from interfering with their play, for example if you decide to remove a class from the game (random example), do something for the players who played that class, such as giving them levels in a different class or whatever you find reasonable.

Personally, if I were to look at this as a would-be builder/coder applicant, the "in development for 4 years and still not in beta" would -not- be a positive for me. My first reaction is "so when will my areas/code be enjoyed by an actual playerbase? 2015? Will MUDs exist then?" It gives the impression (not saying it's actually true of course) that either the game will never open and will just drag on and on until it dies, or the game owners and admins are terribly nitpicky and won't do anything until every hair is in place. It may be one of the reasons why your applicants don't "stick" - they arrive, learn the systems, then slowly the novelty wears off and they have no reason to continue, because there is no real playerbase and there is no sign of one on the horizon. If I don't feel like anyone will get the chance to enjoy my work while I'm still interested in the game, what's the point?

(Comment added by Magnus_AV on Tue Aug 5 20:34:40 2008)

Just to tack something on the end: I wouldn't worry about bad reviews, unless your game is actually unplayable or hugely frustrating. No one's going to go around with their little checklist and make notes of how many spelling errors there are, especially not for a game that makes the beta status clear. Even if someone did post a bad review, it would drop off soon enough and isn't going to stick to the game's reputation forever. The only way that would happen would be if you make a player mad enough to make it their lifelong goal to smear your game, which really won't happen unless you either try to annoy someone, or you happen to attract a random crazy. Either way, I think the pros of going into beta heavily outweigh the cons on this one.

Hades_Kane: Thanks for the advice. As for the posting link there, I actually read that before posting here. :p The distinction is that we're already online and have been online since day one - consistently. :) My concern here is opening the Beta phase to playtesters.

Magnus_AV: As for the four years being a negative, I completely agree. That's part of why this is so frustrating. I want to open already. And of course we'd let the pbase know we're in testing! Honestly, the only real tweaks I expect to make to the game will be skills/spells related - and those blasted areas.

Races and classes themselves are already balanced for the most part - I just want to be certain that no one combination is better than another. Everything else that I say I've compromised on is just basically content that can be added to the game post-opening.

The core features? Done. We just need to code in a few new skills and spells, and with the exception of areas, we're ready to rock & roll. As for being nitpicky, well, the head builder might be a little bit, but she's really quite nice about it. :) Everyone is family, and we're actually having a RL staff party at the end of the month - most of us are from Oregon/Washington.

Any how, I think you've both made some great points. I'm going to think on it for a day or two, but I'll probably wrap everything up, get my ducks all in a row, and see what little bugs and tweaks are needed in testing. :)

Thanks!

-Ilm

Will MUDs exist then?

Muds will exist in 2515 Muds will likely always exist. Will they always be even semi-popular? That unfortunately might be another story, but I doubt they'll ever lose all interest.