|
Where do have these prerequisites suddenly come from? You yourself stated that IRE games are free to play because "the definition of free to play (which is what they SAY) is free to play". Well, based on that definition, so are Threshold and The Eternal City.
Yeah, it's starting to get difficult to answer my questions, isn't it?
How are they supposed to do that when you can't agree with your own definition of "free to play"?
No, I am simply pointing out the flaw with claiming that contests can remove the payment requirement. A rule made for one mud should exist for all - and if were ruled that advancement earned through contests counts as a valid alternative to payment, then such muds would be perfectly entitled to list themselves as free as well.
I understand what you're trying to say, but what you don't seem to realise is that many of the pay-to-play muds have the same sort of approach, and could use the same reasoning to list themselves as free.
Neither are "Playerkilling banned", "No Quests" or "Level-based System".
My post was in direct response to your statement "If a player can get or not in-game advantage has no bearing on the labeling a game "free to play"."
Is that the best counter you can come up with? To deliberately quote me out of context in an attempt to make it look as if I'm saying something I'm not? You really are pathetic...
Approximately what percentage of the overall credits within your mud would you say come from contests?
It is about wanting to provide the right information for prospective players - or at least, not providing misleading information. I've recommended that the whole "pay-for-play" entry be removed entirely, but it seems that some people don't want that, either. I wonder why.
It makes little difference to me personally, as I specifically choose not to list my mud on TMS. However I still dislike the idea of players being mislead, and have been flaming such adverts long before TMS or IRE existed.
|