|
Whats all this nonsense about lightening the DIKU license about?
I’d like to know what business/economics school the making profit from/accepting donations for DIKU games proponents attend?
Free games have a highly competitive advantage that cannot be surpassed, other than paying people to play them, they are FREE. Only a moron would sacrifice this to raise funds to buy advertising space. In doing so a game would surrender this advantage to compete with profit centred games with weapons of their choosing.
“I see you are highly skilled with the sabre, would you like to choose firearms as the weapons of choice for the upcoming duel, go and trade your sabre for a flintlock while I load up my howitzer.”
That being the case the move would not benefit free game providers as a whole, but merely offer the more naive developers a fast-track to the gallows with certain P2P muds as the hangmen. In regard to offsetting operational costs you don’t have to be a rich kid to set up a game, that’s one of the great beauties of muds. Granted, in times past server space did cost an arm and a leg, but now it is relatively cheap – and in some cases free, especially considering the monthly tariff P2P muds charge. A single developer could easily run a game for the price of their yearly subscription; we aren’t talking Richie Rich millions here. The only time it really becomes somewhat expensive is if you wish to service vast player numbers.
What it would do, as KaVir said, is destroy the community by bringing money into the development equation. Why should I develop and give away all this code just so others can earn money off my hard labour, I think I will withhold it. Coded gifts dry up, new entrants are faced with the daunting task of coding from scratch to keep up with developments, the possibility of creating attractive games becomes the sole domain of large scale operations and the community collapses bit by bit.
The only time such a move would be viable is if someone wished to profit from such an interim strategy in order to fund the development of a fully fledged P2P game, wherein they would be forced to play with firearms eventually, with no choice of doing otherwise. The move to a lightening of the DIKU license would in this case ease their guilty consciences and provide them with nefarious cash infusions. It would allow them to proceed with their pre-planned agendas with a sense of ethical correctness that is currently denied them.
Taken from Sharune Forums
Well, we are in dire need of money for webhosts, advertisement and similar.
Many games give in-game rewards for donations. It is a matter tha is highly debated in the mud community because of the diku licence. However, since many of the top games do this (example medievia, aardwolf etc) we are considering the possibility... It would without doubt increase the donations we would recieve. The idea of having on going advertisement campagins funded is nice.
So what do you think?
Do you think people that donate to make the game better should get something in-game? And if so, what could it be?
NOTE - And the presence of a new donate button would indicate that the POSSIBILITY has become/is becoming a very swift ACTUALITY. And in this particular case the donations won’t be going to support the current DIKU game that is generating the donations, and providing any linked incentives, it will be used to create a new game (profit).
Hephos - just because someone else has done it that doesn’t mean others can do it with impunity. And before you whine about being persecuted, the reason people cast aspersions about your ethical character is because you give them good reason to. You don’t seem to be concerned with what is ethical, but more, what can I get away with and make a profit from. This is perhaps why people doubt your integrity in a variety of matters.
Cutting aside the superficial elements of this specific topic it seems painfully obvious that a pattern has been emerging for a while.
On the one hand we have the same representatives of some P2P muds attempting to affect change, which would directly enhance their own profit making activities – frequently under the guise of false benevolence, ethical concerns, or ethical expositions.
And on the other hand members of a community who prise fun and enjoyment above profit and seek only to truthfully preserve ethical provisions and enable others to actively engage in the joy of mud development.
When push comes to shove I know which ones I would trust and which ones I would scrutinise for ulterior motives geared towards mercenary self-interest. I don’t have anything against earning money from a game per se, providing the tenures of rightful ownership are followed, but enough of the Machiavellian shenanigans they are becoming embarrassing.
|