Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Atyreus · 09-01-2007, 10:35 AM

I prefer the four options:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[ ] Neither Payment nor donations accepted.

The only option that is ever likely to create problems is the third one. In fact, I have little doubt that if this method were adopted we would start seeing "Mud X claims that donations are NOT rewarded in-game but players who buy their coffee mugs and t-shirts get special treatment!!!!!!!!!!!!!" threads.

While I agree that the two-option method is more easily verifiable, it isn't particularly useful. The four-option method gives a player the same information (whether or not money is accepted in some form and could thus affect gameplay whether or not it is supposed to), and further allows the player to determine whether a payment/subscription is required and, if not, whether or not the game is ostensibly designed to provide in-game benefits in exchange for payments/donations. The benefits of this added information outweigh whatever disadvantages the four-option method may have in allowing some bad actors to portray their games as "payment/donation accepted but not rewarded in-game" while playing favorites to their biggest donors.

In this case, what the mud presents as its model with the four-option method is going to be more informative than the limited but more easily verifiable two-option method. Using the two-option model, one could also argue that the number of players online field should be limited to two choices:

[ ] Game is multiplayer
[ ] Game is not multiplayer

This method is, after all, very easily verifiable and leaves no wiggle room, whereas a mud owner could always doctor a who list, populate a mud with bots, and/or ask certain trusted players to keep 6-7 characters logged in at a time.

09-01-2007, 10:35 AM	#304
Atyreus Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Home MUD: The Dreaming City Posts: 60	Re: What does "Free" Mean? I prefer the four options: [ ] Payment and/or donations required to play. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game. [ ] Neither Payment nor donations accepted. The only option that is ever likely to create problems is the third one. In fact, I have little doubt that if this method were adopted we would start seeing "Mud X claims that donations are NOT rewarded in-game but players who buy their coffee mugs and t-shirts get special treatment!!!!!!!!!!!!!" threads. While I agree that the two-option method is more easily verifiable, it isn't particularly useful. The four-option method gives a player the same information (whether or not money is accepted in some form and could thus affect gameplay whether or not it is supposed to), and further allows the player to determine whether a payment/subscription is required and, if not, whether or not the game is ostensibly designed to provide in-game benefits in exchange for payments/donations. The benefits of this added information outweigh whatever disadvantages the four-option method may have in allowing some bad actors to portray their games as "payment/donation accepted but not rewarded in-game" while playing favorites to their biggest donors. In this case, what the mud presents as its model with the four-option method is going to be more informative than the limited but more easily verifiable two-option method. Using the two-option model, one could also argue that the number of players online field should be limited to two choices: [ ] Game is multiplayer [ ] Game is not multiplayer This method is, after all, very easily verifiable and leaves no wiggle room, whereas a mud owner could always doctor a who list, populate a mud with bots, and/or ask certain trusted players to keep 6-7 characters logged in at a time.