Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

shasarak · 05-11-2008, 10:07 AM

I'm coming to this thread a little late, so I apologise if what I say has already been covered; but it seems to me that arguing about whether or not a pay-for-perks model is "fair" is really missing the point. I think both sides are missing the point. It seems to me that a pay-for-perks model is deeply, profoundly unfair, but that this doesn't actually matter a damn.

Some people will feel (as I do) that they want to progress in a game by virtue of their innate cunning and and game-related ingenuity. To people like me, a pay-for-perks model is repulsive, because on a pay-for-perks MUD I will continually get pwned by 733t hax0r kiddies whose skill is vastly inferior to my own, but who have managed to overcome that disadvantage simply by having rich parents.

I couldn't stand playing on a MUD like that. And so I don't.

There are plenty of MUDs out there that are not pay-for-perks, and so, if I want to do some MUDding, I'll choose one of them.

But not everyone feels like that. Some people have reached a time in their lives where they can't actually be bothered to spend hour after hour grinding through the lower levels of a MUD in order to become powerful. They simply don't find that kind of game fun any more. What they want is to be able to progress at a rate that is comfortable to them and that they are capable of sustaining. A person like that would actively prefer a pay-for-perks model, because they can use cash to compensate for their lack of free-time.

The important point is that, however much I may personaly dislike pay-for-perks MUDs, I haven't the slightest objection to other people playing them. I wouldn't dream of suggesting that, simply beause pay-for-perks-lovers have different wants and needs from mine that no one should be allowed to cater for those needs. If a previously non-pfp MUD that I had spent a long time on suddenly decided to switch models I might make a fuss about that - "but this will so change the nature of the MUD it will no longer be recognisably the same game", etc. - but otherwise it's simply a case of "live and let live" - you guys play the type of game you like, and I'll play what I like.

It's a terrible mistake for pay-for-perks admins to try to claim that pay-for-perks is "fair"; it isn't, and they just make themselves look stupid if they say it is. What they should be saying is "no, of course it's not fair, but that's the whole point - this is a game for people who don't want the game to be fair. Why is that a problem?"

05-11-2008, 10:07 AM	#48
shasarak Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Emily's Shop Posts: 60	Re: What Does "Fair" Mean? I'm coming to this thread a little late, so I apologise if what I say has already been covered; but it seems to me that arguing about whether or not a pay-for-perks model is "fair" is really missing the point. I think both sides are missing the point. It seems to me that a pay-for-perks model is deeply, profoundly unfair, but that this doesn't actually matter a damn. Some people will feel (as I do) that they want to progress in a game by virtue of their innate cunning and and game-related ingenuity. To people like me, a pay-for-perks model is repulsive, because on a pay-for-perks MUD I will continually get pwned by 733t hax0r kiddies whose skill is vastly inferior to my own, but who have managed to overcome that disadvantage simply by having rich parents. I couldn't stand playing on a MUD like that. And so I don't. There are plenty of MUDs out there that are not pay-for-perks, and so, if I want to do some MUDding, I'll choose one of them. But not everyone feels like that. Some people have reached a time in their lives where they can't actually be bothered to spend hour after hour grinding through the lower levels of a MUD in order to become powerful. They simply don't find that kind of game fun any more. What they want is to be able to progress at a rate that is comfortable to them and that they are capable of sustaining. A person like that would actively prefer a pay-for-perks model, because they can use cash to compensate for their lack of free-time. The important point is that, however much I may personaly dislike pay-for-perks MUDs, I haven't the slightest objection to other people playing them. I wouldn't dream of suggesting that, simply beause pay-for-perks-lovers have different wants and needs from mine that no one should be allowed to cater for those needs. If a previously non-pfp MUD that I had spent a long time on suddenly decided to switch models I might make a fuss about that - "but this will so change the nature of the MUD it will no longer be recognisably the same game", etc. - but otherwise it's simply a case of "live and let live" - you guys play the type of game you like, and I'll play what I like. It's a terrible mistake for pay-for-perks admins to try to claim that pay-for-perks is "fair"; it isn't, and they just make themselves look stupid if they say it is. What they should be saying is "no, of course it's not fair, but that's the whole point - this is a game for people who don't want the game to be fair. Why is that a problem?"