[Zhiroc]

I sorta have to chuckle.

A hundred posts ago, the thread centered around complaints that a MUD could say that it was free to play. So, an effor was made to come up with some system to quantify it, and in the end... we're back to a system where the same MUD would still simply say it was free to play, but maybe in a dedicated field rather than the description.

Doesn't seem like we've added a lot of value here. In fact, if this is the answer, I'd save the effort and not make any changes, because there's nothing useful added.

OK, granted the payment models among all the various MUDs are really hard to classify.... but that's the problem, really. In the MMORPG world, it is quite simple for the most part. And there's something about this simplicity that just seems more honest and fair to me.

OK one last chance. There is one classification that you can't get around or complicate: a game that accepts no payment or donations, period. There seems to be a user base that finds that extremely important. So, let's just have a checkbox that lets a MUD state that they accept no money. The whole point is to have a searchable criteria, isn't it? And if these free games aren't any good, well, you get what you pay for. But you know, a lot of them are good. As good as any other.

A while back, there was a thread bemoaning the lack of activity on the site, if I recall. And there were all these calls to find ways to make the site more relevant to John Q Gamer. But yet, when discussions about the database come up, whether it be payment model or reviews or whatnot, it seems there is a lot of focus not on what serves the gaming public, but what serves the game producers.

I look at a site like MMORPG.com that has a huge amount of traffic and activity, and I see very much an opposite view, at least, in my opinion. It's filled with the fanbois, and the flamers, and all those in between. But not so much the game producers themselves. And /that's/ what I think makes it a much more vibrant site.