Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch!

Shane · 05-06-2006, 08:52 PM

Hmm.

Well, that's a little hardball-esque I suppose, but on the other hand if Matt feels the distinction would make advertising here worthless, certainly he has the right to stop using the site if he wants.

I have to say though that without going to the extreme of making two entirely separate lists, one could have a tag that goes alongside the logos of the various muds to tell if they were commercial or not. That way the pay-for-perks or free-to-play crowd, however they choose to define themselves, could still get the exposure they want and the shoppers could have the distinctions quite clearly signalled at a glance on the rankings. If the distinction bothers Matt and others when it is not applied to muds who sell off-game perks like shirts or whatnot, three designations, or even four, would work. I am thinking here pay-to-play (recurring time based fees), pay for perks (pay for in game benefits), marketing-based-charge (for things you can buy like coffee mugs and whatnot), and free.

Marketing-based-charge is an awkward tagline, but you know some other name would work, and you could have simple little icons for each to show on the lists, and maybe even the potential for multiple tags. Maybe a mud is both pay-for-perks and marketing-based, for example, so they would have a little dollar sign with swords crossed in the background (pay for in game benefits) and then one with a little gift wrapped present (pay for stuff from a website associated, marketing etc). Pay per time period could be a flat out dollar sign and free could be a dollar sign with the red circle and hashmark thingy on it (no pay).

I really, honestly do believe though that the simple fact that the commercial muds advertise as "free-to-play" instead of just "free" like most muds do that are proud of their heritage as entirely non-commercial is enough for most people to make the distinction, though I do feel bad for the fellow who started this thread, as apparently he did not.

I picked up on it rather quickly when I visited their sites.

05-06-2006, 08:52 PM	#39
Shane Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 159	Hmm. Well, that's a little hardball-esque I suppose, but on the other hand if Matt feels the distinction would make advertising here worthless, certainly he has the right to stop using the site if he wants. I have to say though that without going to the extreme of making two entirely separate lists, one could have a tag that goes alongside the logos of the various muds to tell if they were commercial or not. That way the pay-for-perks or free-to-play crowd, however they choose to define themselves, could still get the exposure they want and the shoppers could have the distinctions quite clearly signalled at a glance on the rankings. If the distinction bothers Matt and others when it is not applied to muds who sell off-game perks like shirts or whatnot, three designations, or even four, would work. I am thinking here pay-to-play (recurring time based fees), pay for perks (pay for in game benefits), marketing-based-charge (for things you can buy like coffee mugs and whatnot), and free. Marketing-based-charge is an awkward tagline, but you know some other name would work, and you could have simple little icons for each to show on the lists, and maybe even the potential for multiple tags. Maybe a mud is both pay-for-perks and marketing-based, for example, so they would have a little dollar sign with swords crossed in the background (pay for in game benefits) and then one with a little gift wrapped present (pay for stuff from a website associated, marketing etc). Pay per time period could be a flat out dollar sign and free could be a dollar sign with the red circle and hashmark thingy on it (no pay). I really, honestly do believe though that the simple fact that the commercial muds advertise as "free-to-play" instead of just "free" like most muds do that are proud of their heritage as entirely non-commercial is enough for most people to make the distinction, though I do feel bad for the fellow who started this thread, as apparently he did not. I picked up on it rather quickly when I visited their sites.