I don't want to beat a dead horse here but this isn't about Mud its in response to some of the comments saying the big budget vs no budget haunts and who has better actors.
I have been to many low budget haunts, and many big budget ones. The best actors I find are not in low budget haunts that is a fact. Most low budget haunts do not have money to pay actors so they usually rely on family members and friends or use whoever they can get to volunteer from the charity or cause. Sure, some are good by nature and can surprise you some are energetic and perfect! But the VAST majority of actors at these types of haunts are kids, sometimes as young as under 10. Not being able to afford professional costumes and a silicone mask is ok, but you see that no thought or creativity goes into to many costumes at these haunts. No big budget haunt would allow for white sneakers, skin showing, and brand name logos on the clothing. Sure it does happen but not very often.
Also for those alluding to low budget haunts being scary and actors better did you ever consider the notion that the actors are necessarily better but you just notice the actors more because they are right out in the open with no detailed sets to distract you? They are built for low throughput so they can spend more time talking to you (which by the way gets annoying) where big haunts need to do quick hit scares because they have to move through more people. Many big haunts have experienced actors where if you took them out and inserted them in a low budget haunt they'd kill it much more effectively.
I'm just saying its not that the actors are better at a low budget haunt per se it's just you pay more attention to them.