|
If it is so obvious, what is wrong with color-coding MUDs by their business plan? Accurate labeling is all people are asking for. If it's obvious, an accurate label is harmless.
Nothing's wrong with it. In fact, I think adding another filter to the database the same way you can search for size, average players, PK status, etc. would be a wonderful idea. Certainly better than the idea being tossed around about creating two seperate lists.
Seems to me there's two seperate debates going on here - whether muds that offer paid perks are deceiving their players somehow, and whether things should be made "fair" by seperating the lists into free and pay-for-perks.
I was arguing about the first, not the second - the second issue should be a no-brainer to anyone with a modicum of common sense.
I'm not asking IRE to label the game "perks make you more powerful". Everyone knows why they sell perks-- it's an instant leg up. Heck, I'm not asking IRE to do anything.
Exactly, which makes it so baffling why Zhiroc and others are griping that players somehow don't know what they're getting into if they play an IRE (or other pay-for-perks) game. Not exactly rocket science to anyone that's purchased something with optional services available before.
I'm asking TMS to flag MUDs by business model. No separate lists. No visibility differences. Just an icon or color code that lets players know whether paying for in-game content is disallowed, optional, or possible.
I would be in complete and total agreement with this.
|