Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I think we are turning this into a too big of a deal. I asked Lasher if he could produce us with some statistics after this has been implemented. That way we will know 3 months or 6 months from now whether the actual enduser found this kind of ranking relevant at all, and I am sure that this decision can then be revisited. In the meantime, why not give it the benefit of doubt and see what happens?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I think most of us realise that that has been your stance all along. However almost every other poster on this thread has recognised the limitations of the current approach and is looking for something that provides more information for the players, while also allowing the mud owners to more clearly label their payment model.

Lasher's proposal is exactly that:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[ ] Neither Payment nor donations accepted.

Combined with the text box idea, it's a win-win situation for everyone. The players have more information for their search criteria, and the mud owners can clarify exactly what sort of payment model they're using.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

1) It's rude to categorize the people advocating the multiple-category system as simply "yelling the loudest". Address the argument, instead of consistently trying to marginalize its supporters.

2) No one has shown an example of a game which was not trivial to categorize by KaVir's suggestions. Every MUD proposed has been rapidly marked in the four-category system without controversy. That suggests the model is using criteria that are neither inaccurate nor vague. Most importantly, it uses criteria that players certainly do care about-- whether or not you acknowledge a difference between mandatory-fee, pay-for-perks, and selling T-shirts on a website, the people using the search function certainly do.

3) In contrast, you haven't addressed the fact that a search function that returns 95%+ of TMS's MUDs in one category is not useful to searchers. Equating a MUD that wouldn't refuse a voluntary donation to DragonRealms ($50-$75/month plus optional perks) is ridiculous-- I'd care about that difference, and I'm relatively wealthy by US standards. Most high school or college students would care, as would a lot of adults who don't have a lot to spare for entertainment. You might as well be suggesting "MUDs with vowels in their name" as a criterion. That would be very factual, easily verifiable.... and completely useless.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I prefer the four options:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[ ] Neither Payment nor donations accepted.

The only option that is ever likely to create problems is the third one. In fact, I have little doubt that if this method were adopted we would start seeing "Mud X claims that donations are NOT rewarded in-game but players who buy their coffee mugs and t-shirts get special treatment!!!!!!!!!!!!!" threads.

While I agree that the two-option method is more easily verifiable, it isn't particularly useful. The four-option method gives a player the same information (whether or not money is accepted in some form and could thus affect gameplay whether or not it is supposed to), and further allows the player to determine whether a payment/subscription is required and, if not, whether or not the game is ostensibly designed to provide in-game benefits in exchange for payments/donations. The benefits of this added information outweigh whatever disadvantages the four-option method may have in allowing some bad actors to portray their games as "payment/donation accepted but not rewarded in-game" while playing favorites to their biggest donors.

In this case, what the mud presents as its model with the four-option method is going to be more informative than the limited but more easily verifiable two-option method. Using the two-option model, one could also argue that the number of players online field should be limited to two choices:

[ ] Game is multiplayer
[ ] Game is not multiplayer

This method is, after all, very easily verifiable and leaves no wiggle room, whereas a mud owner could always doctor a who list, populate a mud with bots, and/or ask certain trusted players to keep 6-7 characters logged in at a time.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Well you're always going to encounter the occasional claims of "special treatment", regardless of whether or not cash is involved (the imms help their friends, the owner helps his girlfriend, the admin boost their own characters, etc), but for listing categorises I think it's important to stick to the unambigious verifiable facts - and the four-choice solution does exactly that.

The advantage of separating the last two options (not accepted vs not rewarded) is that the player is kept aware of whether or not money is involved. The third option is effectively saying "The official stance of this mud is that payments and donations have no effect within the game - but they do accept payment and/or donations, and there's no way to verify what unofficial impact it may have on the relationship between players and staff".

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

<Snip snip: Please refrain from personal attacks against other members - Xerihae>

But I have read tons of examples in this thread alone of situations where the 4 choice options failed miserably to address a situation accurately.

Merchandise, subscriptions, pay-for-perks, etc. are functionally the same. They all create a business relationship between player and admin. That is the most critical difference between a truly free mud and a non-free mud.

It is also incredibly naive to claim there is no effect on the way people are treated once they have sent money into a game (for whatever reason). That's just completely bogus. I think we would be doing players a grave disservice by making them think there WAS a difference, when there just isn't.

Furthermore, there is absolutely NOTHING clear or accurate about the hopelessly vague "rewarded in game" concept.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Exactly. And that is why it would be a titantic mistake to *CREATE* flame fodder.

Everyone here who makes games knows this implicitly. You do not release into your game things that you KNOW IN ADVANCE will be abused, misused, and will create chaos. It just doesn't make sense.

As a player, I'd be pretty annoyed when I searched for games where payments were not "rewarded in game" and then found out that people who buy merchandise get faster customer service or get the "admin's ear" more easily. And honestly, there is no way you can guarantee that such things don't happen.

The 4 option list creates an implicit guarantee to the player using the search options that the information is correct. That makes it infinitely worse than the obvious marketing blurb being something other than what a player expected.

The status quo is better than deliberately creating something that is completely ambiguous, vague, and frankly, deceptive.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

That may be how you view it. But I can tell you, that I will never, ever play a pay-for-perks game again.

I will, however, play without agonizing over it, a required-pay OR a donation/merchandising/anything that is out-of-game game. So, for me at least, they are not functionally the same.

And you know how I feel about the word "free" :)

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

<Snippy: Removed reference to snipped post - Xerihae>

No, you haven't. In fact I specifically asked if anyone could come up with any situations that didn't fit the four-option system, and nobody has.

You're saying that the following are functionally the same?

1. Everything in the game is free, but you can buy t-shirts from the website.
2. It costs $10 per month to play.
3. Play for free, but costs $1000 perks to create a full strength character.

Don't you think there might be a difference from the perspective of the player who's looking for a new mud to play?

The four-option system also takes into account whether or not money changes hands.

The concept is both clear and accurate, and has already been explained. No examples have yet been provided which aren't clearly and easily identified as being rewarded in game or not.

You'd be clicking on the wrong search box. If you want a game where people can't even buy merchandise, you should have clicked only the last box:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
[X] Neither Payment nor donations accepted.

No listing option does that. There's no way to guarantee that a mud has been truthful about its creation date, or that an LPMud doesn't list itself as "Custom". If you dismiss the value of options that people could potentially lie about, you'll end up with no search options at all.

But the four-option system is about as clear and unambigious as you can get, and while nobody is likely to find out about the player who slips the mud owner $50 for a secret in-game bonus, neither would your own two-option system.

Is anyone other than the Thresholds actually still arguing in favour of a two-option system?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

It looks like this argument will never end, but I still do not like this module because of the failure to properly categorize. I'll explain here:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
This is all well and good but as I've stated before few will check this box as it stands mainly because "required" is ambiquous. There is not a Text mud out there that requires you to PAY immediately before you can log on. Many require you to "register" a valid email, but not send money. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong here.

[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewarded in-game.
Nicely worded, but as we've seen in this thread, rewarded in game is ambiquous and I'm not trying to be Clintonesque. Rewarded in game can be easily circumvented by what you believe a reward is.

[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
This will likely be 95% of the checks of muds here. Again a ruination of the reason for the options.

[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, not rewarded in-game.
Like the above, very few will check this giving a lack of broad range for the player that is seeking a "free" game, but wants some options, more than just getting 5 responses to the query, four of which are MUSHES when they are seeking a MUD.

I have to again promote the 2 Selections with multiple options under the first selection as the best answer. The main reason is that you could gain a multitude of responses based solely on your preferences for the check options as shown:
---------------------------------------------------


[ ] This mud has some donation, registration, and/or payment features.

(Sub options, click as many as apply)

{ } Paying registration is required to play.

{ } Paying registration is required at certain levels.

{ } Donations are required at certain levels.

{ } Donations are encouraged but not required.

{ } Rewards are part of donations/registrations/payments.

{ } Rewards are not part of donations/registrations/payments.

{ } All rewards in this game can be received without paying registration.

{ } All rewards in this game can be received without donations.

(There could be several more option boxes but I think you get the picture)

[ ] This mud does not accept money (donations/registrations/credits) in any form.
---------------------------------------------------

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The option is "Payment and/or donations required to play", not "Payment and/or donations required to log on". On the front page of TMS click the "Click here for advanced search" link, go down to "Pay to play Mud?:" and click "Yes". There are 31 muds listed, and all of these would use the above option.

The intent is clear - payments and/or donations result in some form of recompense within the game. I think the wording is also clear, but it could be changed to something else, or there could be some sort of help text beside the listing to make it clear to the mud owners which option they should select.

I suspect it'll be the most popular, but I'd be surprised if more than half the muds checked that box. Even if they did, it'd still be an improvement over the current system, and the text area would allow the muds to further elaborate on what sort of form the payments or donations take.

I suspect quite a lot of muds would click this option as well, but it'll be hard to know for sure without seeing it in action. Either way, it's a distinction that's clear and verifiable, and which at least some people feel strongly about, therefore I don't see any harm in including it (and I note your own suggestion includes it as one of the two main categories).

While I like the idea of more options, those listed in your proposal are far too ambigious and open to (mis)interpretation. Something similar was discussed and dismissed back at the start of the thread, and the reasons for doing so are still valid.

We've had 11 pages mostly discussing a four-option approach, and still can't reach a full consensus, so for the sake of practicality (and sanity) I think the best solution would be to go with what we've mostly agreed on (the four choices with a text box). I know the Thresholds want the system to stay the way it is, but as far as I'm aware you're the only other person who's actively against it - and that's because you want more options. But if you want more information, surely you'd prefer the four-option approach to the current "pay-to-play vs free-to-play"? Perhaps it'd be better to do this one step at a time - add the four-option solution, see how it works out, and if you still think it falls short propose another refinement.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I honestly find New World's system to be the most useful. Is there money involved in the transaction or not? Yes? How is it involved? You've answered the basic question that people want to know, and you've added the details they need to know. It's an expansion of the two choice system that I like VERY much. I find it to be more accurate as well as more helpful to players.

I know that if I want to play a free game, then I want no money to be involved at all. That way, there's no sneaky ways that money come into play that can't be gauged otherwise.

I think it's easy to see why many people want the four option system. Most of them do fall into one category, but that category also has a TON of wiggle room and is impossible to enforce. Until you can get rid of the word "rewarded", we'll just keep having the "free" discussion every few months, and people will keep flaming each other over it every few months.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, has results in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no results in-game.
[ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I like chaosprime's minor wording change best out of all the options so far.

As for suggestions of adding more types of options to the options - remember, this has to be something that someone searching for a mud will search for. If I'm looking for a mud, I'm not going to spend 15 minutes trying to decide which of the 150 different click boxes I need to check off. As a player, here's my personal list of things I'm looking for:

RPI
ONLY voluntary Donations accepted as any monetary exchange, and with no in-game returns at all, of any kind.
English language

and - if filters were added, I would filter out mushes so they didn't show up on the list.

Then - once I had the list of whatever shows up, I'd be able to check each game with a name that sounds intriguing to me, for all the OTHER criteria I'd look for in a game - such as a stable server, a game that's been around awhile and is "gold" (not in testing phase), a fully-functioning website complete with game documentation and helpfiles, and I'd also see to make sure the game is basic telnet-compatible and doesn't require a browser to access, and doesn't force colors as a default, and allows the player to use their own color scheme - or none at all if they prefer.

But I wouldn't look for all that stuff in a search engine. I'd only look to see if it's free, if it's an RPI, and if it's in English. If I could choose the "type" of free, the only "type" I'd need to know about, is if it allows people to donate, but doesn't give anything in-game in return for the donation. If it has a cafe-press link, I'll find it AFTER I've determined that I don't have to pay for anything AND I don't have to compete with people who do pay something. The four options are just enough - not too few, not too many, to keep my interest.

Not unlike all my clear, concise, brief (heh) , and perfectly proportioned posts. :)

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The current system (pay-to-play vs. free-to-play) creates flame fodder because people feel that certain business models should be labeled as something other than what they currently are (just for the record, I've personally have never had a problem with IRE or similarly financed games declaring themselves to be free to play). The two-option system you propose is going to create flame fodder for a very similar reason: the same people who felt that there was something not quite right about, say, an IRE game being grouped in the same free-to-play category as their own we-don't-solicit-but-will-accept-the-occasional-donation-to-upgrade-the-server mud can certainly be relied on to not be happy about being included yet again with the very muds that run business models that are significantly distinct from their own.

Your proposal realigns the field a little bit, but completely fails to acknowledge the distinctions that those advocating a change have been clamoring for.

By that reasoning, however, we should do away with letting mud admins author their own information pages and should just let a select group of auditors do the work instead.

Players are just as capable as those who support the two-option system of looking at muds in the "payment/donations accepted, not rewarded in-game" category and concluding that the possibility exists that donors might be rewarded in some way (whether consciously or not) by the game's admins. Like your proposed system, the four-option method gives them the information you seem to think is so vital - that payment is accepted in some form from players - and allows them to avoid such games if they are the sort to assume that all such payments are probably rewarded no matter what the admin claims.

Yes, I'd probably be annoyed if I logged into a game that claimed that they didn't provide in-game rewards for donations, only to find out that they actually did. I might also be annoyed if they claimed to be full PK and I logged in and found all sorts of PK restrictions in place, or if they claimed to have a bajillion rooms and I logged in and found out there were maybe only a couple thousand, or if they claimed to be running a custom codebase but were running a thinly-disguised LP mudlib instead. I still wouldn't support limiting the information available in any of the relevant search fields just because it might make the veracity of the information volunteered a bit more easily verifiable, particularly not when the amount of information available to me drops significantly.

I'm not sure how the two-option method is supposed to be less ambiguous than the four-option method. Yes, it tells me a mud accepts payment in some form from players (as does the four-option method), but it completely leaves open the next couple of questions that would come naturally to most consumers: (1) Is a payment required? and (2) What, if anything, do I get in exchange for said payment?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I can only assume you didn't read my post about the two item option + system which is by far better than the four option system IMO, frankly because of the reasons I posted about the four option system. In short, the four option will really turn into a two option with 95% of the muds claiming option 3 and the other 5% claiming option 4.

With the 2 option system (plus multiple sub selections if you select the first option), you guaranty a fine breakdown of selections that will lead to superior searching.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

You are right. And honestly, people should mind their own business more and not obsess so much over how other people choose to market their games. It is no wonder our segment of the gaming industry flounders: too many people devote too much of their energy towards taking someone else's MUD down. That time and effort would be much better spent making one's own game better.

As a side note, this is another reason why I think the whole payment issue should be avoided completely in any official capacity by Lasher or the search options. It is an example of some people being busy-bodies and trying to force their own opinions on everyone else.

It isn't really analogous. People are very aware that the hand written areas are written by the MUD operators. It is obvious in advance that there is an inherent bias. But checkboxes have a much greater implication of accuracy, as if the operator of the site has verified that information himself/herself. That is why I think checkboxes for this issue are especially bad - particularly since this involves money and therefore makes it more contentious than comparatively trivial things like PK rules, number of rooms, etc.





Yeah, but the thing is, people aren't really crushed by minor inaccuracies or exaggerations in those areas. If the number of rooms isn't exactly what was claimed, or the PK system is a little different than they expected, or the codebase is a little different, most people really don't care very much. But when it comes to money, people care a LOT. That is why this particular set of checkboxes is more serious than any of the others, and that is why Lasher shouldn't even touch it. Being wrong (which will most certainly happen in many cases) is more serious when it comes to money than in any of the other little factoids.

If I thought I rented a drama, but it turns out to be more of a dramedy, I might be a tad annoyed. But if the movie was good, I ultimately don't care. I also won't be mad at the store I rented it from. I'll be mad at the people who made the movie.

But if the sign says it costs $4 to rent the movie, and later I find out I got charged $6, I am going to be enormously ticked off. And now I am mad at the store (and the people who run the store), not the people who made the movie.


Something is not ambiguous simply because it "only" answers one question instead of many. The 2 option method answers the MOST important question and does so with complete clarity: does money change hands between player and admin or not?

The 2 option method is less ambiguous because it does not introduce subjective concepts like "rewarded in game", "has an effect on the game", or even "donations vs. payments." Furthermore, it doesn't scam an innocent player into thinking there is any such thing as money NOT affecting the relationship between player and admin once there is any financial transaction.

But in the end, the superiority and greater accuracy of the 2 options vs. the 4 still does not avoid the much larger problem. That is the fact that we have MUD admins obsessing over the way other MUDs advertise themselves, and seem to think it is appropriate for them to force certain MUDs into a less advantageous marketing position. That kind of behavior should be ignored and shamed, not catered to.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Nice. That addresses the complaints about the use of the word "rewarded", while still remaining concise.

When you market your game on TMS, it is other people's business. It's the business of the other muds you're competing with, it's the business of the players who are looking for a mud to play, and it's the business of Lasher as site owner.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Could you please cite one of these examples, using an actual game? I've searched the thread and I'm unable to find your examples.

No, they are fundamentally different to the player because some are required payments, and the other two are optional, with or without a difference in play if they are ignored. This absolutely matters to a player.

Again, do you really think a player wouldn't pay attention to the difference between the DragonRealms model ($50-$75/month plus additional fees for perks available) and a game that offered CafePress T-Shirts? Are you saying that difference isn't important to a player?

If a player subscribes to your viewpoint that purchasing T-shirts or whatever impacts the fairness of the game, they can search for only games which check:

[ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

The four-option system's additional flexibility puts that choice in the hands of the searcher, instead of obscuring it among one tiny category and one monolithic category that ignores all differences between financial models.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

The participation in these threads suggests that people disagree with that notion. The way that you presently market your game cheapens the way we use 'free' in our advertising. We both know there is a difference, but you're arguing for a system that suppresses that difference, and that is my business. One of the marketing strengths of our game is that there's no way to spend money and impact gameplay. That's appealing to a lot of players (from our own feedback), and we want a way to get that fact out.

Lasher has a distinct stake in the site being useful to as many people as possible. A maximally useful search function makes the site more useful to players who have an interest in MUDs and are trying to find the right one for them.

Imagine how upset you would have been if the store called the rental "free", but didn't mention a $6 fee if you want to watch the film. If the $2 deception ticked you off, I'd imagine the $6 version would be much more upsetting.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Did you miss my whole post on the breakdown I gave on why the four option system doesn't work? It's post #310 if you are curious, so I don't have to site the whole thing.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I read your post, which is effectively a nine-/ten-/whathaveyou-option approach. I would have no problem with more finely delineated options if they were clear and meaningfully distinct. The implementation you propose doesn't yet meet that criteria, particularly since it is possible to select more than one choice from among some mutually exclusive choices.

Some other issues include:
What's the distinction between these two categories? If a donation is required, doesn't it, by definition, become a subscription/registration fee?

What constitutes encouraged? Trying to distinguish between donations which are encouraged vs. those which are merely requested would be even more vague than trying to distinguish between in-game rewards which influence competition and those which are supposedly only cosmetic.

Again, what's the meaningful distinction between these categories? Is there supposed to be some criteria which distinguishes between voluntary payments which are registration fees and voluntary payments which are donations?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

No, they are different but not fundamentally different. The fundamental difference is between games that absolutely never accept money in any form, and those who do. Beyond that, the differences are relatively minor.


First, your example is an exaggeration. Second, that difference might be important to some players, but it is nowhere near as important as the more significant difference between taking money in some form or not taking money in any form.


Actually, it lets merchandise sellers get away with saying they don't accept payments, and that is just false.

Furthermore, it is deceptive by making it sound like there is ANY time when money changing hands does not result in "rewards" or "an effect in game" or anything like that. Once money changes hands, the relationship is dramatically changed forever. It is deceptive and naive to claim otherwise.

The participation of what, 10 people? That is hardly a grass roots movement.

The ugly truth finally comes out. You want this change because you want a marketing advantage over Threshold and other games that are free but have pay-for-perks or other optional things. I have been saying this was the motive all along, and people criticized me for making such an accusation. Now we know it was true from the beginning.

Frankly, I don't think games that sell merchandise are any different than games that sell perks. I also don't think buying merchandise never affects gameplay. I am certain that someone in power knows who buys what, and there are times when that affects their decisions or their priorities. It would be hopelessly naive to claim otherwise.

Now that we know the true motive, I think that kills this idea. Now we know that the motive behind this is not educating players, but a handful of mud operators trying to unbalance the marketing playing field in their favor. There couldn't be a WORSE reason for changing something than that.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Naive? I'd say idealistic perhaps, but not everyone is so jaded as to believe that there's no such thing as an instance where such a transaction would not affect gameplay. To use MMO's as an example, do you believe that a bunch of fans buying their favourite MMO t-shirt/baseball cap/mug would affect the way they're treated in-game in any way? Or is your objection solely applicable to MUDs because the player-base tends to be smaller and there is more chance of interactivity between staff and players?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I really don't think you can compare 10's of thousands of players on a Graphical multi-million dollar game to the significantly less in text muds. Yes, I think very strongly that when a person buys something they are viewed as a supporter of the game/system and treated accordingly.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Argh! Ok, I just want to comment on one issue in this thread. Someone brought up "merchandise" as a form of payment. My only question is, "Does this effect game play?" If the answer is, "No, buying our T-Shirt doesn't have any effect at all on the game world, other than to help us keep the servers going.", then its the ****same**** thing as donations, basically. You don't "have to" buy it to get anything in the game. If you want to get bloody picky about this kind of BS, then change the options to say something like, "Donations accepted (or merchandise perchases, where applicable)." And I agree with people's assesments of the situation. Some people don't want anyone to be able to look for a mud based on rational criteria, since that would lend itself to people skipping their muds, which means they can't hook them like a fish, then get them to buy ingame incentives. I haven't seen this much nonsense over a simple issue since the last time I read anything from the Disco Institute in support of ID in schools, or since Bill Clinton tried to insist that his entire guilt rested on which definition of "is" one used.

As for the issue of people buying things getting perks from buying something. If the mud is honest, then it doesn't matter. If they are not, then we **will hear about it**. I came up with the slogan for the T-Shirt sold from Ages of Despair, to help defray their costs. I got a free one from them for it. So far, no one, including me, has gotten anything at all for buying one, other than my initial *out of game* reward for winning the contest. That is an honest mud. Some other mud wants to give people freebies for it, someone is going to talk, someone will notice, and someone will post about it, leaving the mud in question with a serious problem, if they want to keep their "status" in any such list. If someone here is suggesting the changes for that reason, they are **going** to be the people looked at the hardest, dissected if it appears they did cheat, and the first to pay the price for intentionally cheating the system. I would think that would be a big fracking, "Duh!"

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I think that the points have been made and everyone is now just "flogging a dead horse." Anything more would just be a re-hash of what has already been discussed.

There has been several threads that have been spawned off of this thread, one member banned, a clarification of the rules and moderation activities and a re-jig of the search parameters (so maybe something good did come out of it).

Free was such a simple term before the internet caught the public's eye.

Tricky

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

As far as I'm aware, there are now only three people objecting to the four-choice option:

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, has results in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no results in-game.
[ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

Mina's objection was to the use of the word "rewarded" - but chaosprime's suggestion has changed the wording and thus removed the cause of the objection.

Newworlds wants even more options - but four options are at least an improvement over the current two, so I'm hoping he'll view it as at least a step in the right direction.

Threshold doesn't want any changes at all, as he likes listing his mud as "free". I don't think there's any way to reach a compromise in this case, it's going to have to be a case of either pleasing Threshold, or pleasing everyone else.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

My objection still applies with this new wording. It's not the actual WORD I have a problem with, which I thought I've been really clear in expressing. It's the ambiguity that can be found in the whole proposal. What do you mean by "result"? If there's a person who has a badge in game that says nothing more than "I'm a donator", is that an in-game result or not? "Result" is NO BETTER and potentially WORSE than "reward". Please don't state my opinions for me. I'm more than capable of stating them for myself.

It's kind of easy to be the majority voice when your (again, general you) muds follow the same general payment schemes, and you'd like to get a leg up on muds that advertise in a way in which you disapprove though are actually accurate. Also, the number of "free/donation" mud vastly outnumbers the number of "commercial" muds.

Besides, there are games that still wouldn't fit accurately under your 4 payment system. Take Threshold's old payment system. You paid a MANDATORY $50 registration fee for a lifetime membership of Threshold. You pay that ONCE, and you do get "perks" with it. You can cram it under payment/donations required to play, but it's VERY different from the $15/month fee that you pay to play a number of other games. But would you care about that since it's a COMMERCIAL mud? You guys care if people lump donation in with pay-for-perks, and let's seriously not even begin to delve in the million of ways that "donation" can be abused.

I'm beginning to feel that this whole discussion smacks of a police state mentality when people are continually forced to succumb to big brother and what they decide is "best". Seriously, how is this any different than if Wal-Mart went and harassed the town newspaper because they objected to K-mart's buy-one-get-one free advertisement by claiming it's a scam? Don't try to fool anyone into thinking it's for the benefit of the player because players are simply not as stupid as this thread keeps trying to make them out to be here. If you really want to help players, then you wouldn't object to New World's improvised Two-Choice system, and players who care about whether or not a game is free or not would still be able to find free games easily where NO MONEY changes hands.

This discussion exists for the benefit of mud administrators that object to the fact that you CAN play IRE games for free (free means you pay absolutely no money to play), you CAN play Nodeka for free, and you CAN play Threshold for free, but they feel that this somehow impedes their own mud's advertising. Take the pretty icing off and discuss the real issue. Don't try to sugar coat it and pretend that it's something altruistic. At least Valg has the integrity to state the real issue:

Let's stop trying to pretend this is about the players because it's really not.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

These forced-choice logical fallacies destroy the credibility of everyone I see using them. Interestingly, those people have all been proponents of the two-choice system.

First mincing words about what "reward" means, then not changing argument in any way when "reward" is changed to "result"... not really impressing me either.

Right. So is it my imagination, or did the only player to chime in on this thread express approval of the four-choice + text-box option?

I'm eagerly awaiting seeing a player say, oh, yeah, I don't want to be able to search based on whether a game is pay-to-play, pay-for-perks, or no-money-accepted.

Because, y'know, sock puppet shows are funny.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Why should I change my argument when the results of the "word change" are exactly the same? The ambiguity did not go away just because you casually reworded it. The problem has always been in the possible abuse and how different people define "in-game result/reward", causing the same problem we're having now with the word "free". How is result any better than reward? Seriously, just because you managed to change a word doesn't mean that you actually "fixed" the problem, and don't worry, I wasn't setting out to impress you or anyone else.

Nice straw man. I don't believe that ANYONE arguing this has said this. I, for one, don't have a problem with the idea of searching for money-accepted or no-money-accepted. I don't think I've made my posts unclear about this, so perhaps you are mistaking my opinion about the search with someone else's.

As it is, *I* am a player of MU*s and all manner of online games. My opinion does not become less worthy simply because I have a differing opinion of what is actually useful than others in this forum.

If you haven't noticed, most of the arguments and proponents of this are all mud administrators, and this post was started because of how other muds advertise themselves. New World's expanded two-choice system actually gives more options to administrators than the proposed four-choice ambiguous system. In the end, it lists muds as accurately as the expanded two-choice system, so why are we arguing against it? It is LESS ambiguous and has FAR less room for abuse.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

After my last post, I realize that there's really no point in hashing this out again and again. It's possible that no matter WHAT system is put in place, this discussion will continue to crop up again and again. If I truly believe that players will choose a game based on its gameplay and not what payment system someone else can dictate to me, then there's absolutely no point in discussing this further. Is there anything really new to be said?

All that is left now is for people to criticize each other for having a different opinion, and that's hardly constructive.

So, to whomever I may have offended, I apologize. I ultimately think that all administrators try to do what is best for their game and should be commended for that. To all those who shared their opinion, whether it was popular or unpopular, I thank you for the great read.

Toodles, and I'll see you in other threads.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I am a MU* player. I do not advertise a MU* on this or any other site because I do not own one. I have played MU*s in one form or another for the past 11-12 years.

As a MU* player, here are my opinions on the subject:

The two-options are too general and, while they would lessen the results of my searches, would still have me hunting through these results to find what I was searching for.

The two-options with sub-options are far too convoluted and I feel most of the options have distinction problems.

The four-options would narrow down my search results to exactly what I was searching for. As a player, I feel this would be the best option.

I am reluctant to post this because of the general attitude that I have witnessed over the past week or so since discovering this site. This thread alone has made me feel that maybe MU* developers have forgotten that players are people as well and are not of some sub-standard intelligence. I have no difficulty in reading comprehension and also realize that entries are capable of being falsified.

For the record, I have no problems with commercial MU*s in any form or fashion; be it donations, required payments, or pay-for-perks. I am not here to push my MU* into a more favorable market position, because I do not market a MU*. This is only my opinion as a player.

Arabis

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Chaos' change in the wording is silly. Whether it is reward or results it is the same, come now, let's be realistic here.

The only reason for options was to give the player searching options to narrow the search in a realistic fashion. The four options as stated earlier do nothing but give someone two realistic options. C or D.

As for further arguments. I think it is redundant. Those who want four options will forever want them for their own personal reasons. Those who want two options will forever want them for their personal reasons.

Arabis, just curious what MUD do you play now, if I might ask. I ask because you don't post a home mud as a member.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Currently I do not have a home MUD. I found this site in my search for one to play and have been bouncing from MUD to MUD trying to find one to my liking.

Arabis

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Well! I never.

Actually, I agree completely. We all bloody well know that in-game results, that is, anything at freaking all that's actually in the game, are the same as in-game rewards. It was a way of addressing an argument that was just contrived anyway.

Wha hunh? Utter nonsense. Those of us with more money than time, and I know I'm not the only one of those, would certainly want to be able to search for pay-for-perks MUDs, item B, and people who are willing to pay but don't want the potential escalation nonsense of incremental pay-for-perks will search for item A.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Well, now I can't remember what the four options were, hang on a sec, I'll look them up...
(copied them for my own edification)

a. [ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
b. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, rewards in game.
c. [ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no rewards in game.
d. [ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

Okay, if this gets installed, I'd like the admin after a month or so to post a list like:
Number of muds with A checked: 25%
Number of muds with B checked: 25%
Number of muds with C checked: 25%
Number of muds with D checked: 25%

Here is my guess at the results: A: 0.1%, B:2.9%, C:95%, D:2%.

Answer: Worthless change.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Arabis for president. And whoever gets the privilege of having such a well-written forum member as their newest player in their game, should give him/her a cookie.

Lastly, I agree, and for the same reasons, as a player, not a mud admin/owner.

And furthermore, Arabis looks like Aramis, a men's cologne which I really don't like. I hope you don't smell like that, because then I would have to change my opinion of you.

Love and kisses,
Jaz

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

What are you basing this on? I would have guessed the results would be a lot different, especially C and D. Of course I don't have anything to base it on either, I'm not sure anyone knows unless we try.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

It is my guess based on researching many of the muds listed in the top 40. I actually never found a mud that would check box A, but figured one was out there. I saw a few that would check box B, but because of interpretation I thought several of those would opt to go with C instead. Option C was plentiful. Option D was rare, I'm assuming because most muds I found would not refuse some form of donation.

It is this reason that I think the breakdown of exactly what you get when you pay is so important. Many, I guess do not feel this way.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

This is what you said previously:

"I think it's easy to see why many people want the four option system. Most of them do fall into one category, but that category also has a TON of wiggle room and is impossible to enforce. Until you can get rid of the word "rewarded", we'll just keep having the "free" discussion every few months, and people will keep flaming each other over it every few months."

Emphasis mine. You explicitly objected to a specific word, so it was changed in an attempt to appease you. Please have the decency of not shifting the goal posts every time your concerns are addressed - this thread is already long enough.

Do they get something in-game? Yes.

[ ] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[X] Payment and/or donations accepted, has results in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no results in-game.
[ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

TEXT BOX: Donators get a purely cosmetic badge. No other in-game results.

None that I can think of, and none that have been mentioned here. Oh, there are games where the owners wouldn't be happy about their classification...but none that you can't easily categorise at a glance.

Are you required to pay? Yes. Therefore:

[X] Payment and/or donations required to play.
[X] Payment and/or donations accepted, has results in-game.
[ ] Payment and/or donations accepted, no results in-game.
[ ] Neither payment nor donations accepted.

TEXT BOX: One-off $50 registration fee. Can also purchase perks.

Whether the second box is also clicked would depend on whether Lasher decided to use check boxes or radio buttons.

From the perspective of a player, the fact still remains that they are required to pay. The specifics of that payment could vary dramatically - what if I had a mud that cost $5/year to play? Someone could play that for 10 years for the cost of the old Threshold registration fee, which would likely end up being cheaper for most players. What about the Skotos games that allow you to play a whole range of different games with a single monthly subscription? What about Guild Wars, which has no subscription costs but still requires you to make the initial purchase (the equivilent of a registration fee) and also allows you to purchase expansion packs?

If you start breaking the options down into specific types of payment, they become ambigious - just the same as if you were to try and break the "results in-game" down into specific types of perk.

Fortunately there are only 31 pay-to-play muds on TMS, and people willing to pay are likely to read over each entry first (which means they could view the text boxes). Furthermore, Threshold doesn't even have the registration fee any more, so it wouldn't be classified as payment-required anyway.

It's not about players being "stupid", it's about making the search options easier for them to use. The two players who have posted so far in this thread have both expressed a preference for the four-choice system.

To put it another way:

Threshold has said that people are told about his payment model when they first log on, therefore it's not a secret. That means players who don't like his payment model will simply log off shortly after connecting - all you've achieved is to waste a few minutes of that player's time.

However I've been told by some commercial mud owners that certain players actively prefer pay-for-perks, because they have money but very little time. However there's currently no way for such players to find that type of mud.

Based on the above, I can't see how the four-option system wouldn't be an advantage for your mud. The players who remove "results in-game" from their search options are the same players who would quit anyway, whilst those who want a pay-for-perks system are now more likely to find your game.

The muds that lose out are the ones that hide their payment models (or at least the extent of the required payments) until the player is hooked.


I've already told you, at least twice, that there are currently 31 muds listed on Top Mud Sites that already use the "pay-to-play" option, which was incorporated into the four-choice system as box A.

There is no room for interpretation - that's the beauty of the four-choice system.

Did you actually ask them, or are you just guessing?

Once again this has been explained to you repeatedly: There are a number of people who would favour more options, but it's very difficult to do so unambigiously. Your proposal, whether made in good faith or not, has more holes than a Swiss cheese. The four-choice proposal, while still rather over-generalised, is extremely unambigious - nobody has yet come up with a payment model that can't be clearly categorised at a single glance.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Received requests to keep this thread open so open it stays. Just play nice please!

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Woo Hoo! GAME ON!

Alright what I really think is that we should go to a four opt...oh wait, someone already said that...hmm, Okay, well, if we had a two option...#!@#$!, someone said that too! Well, how about a change in wording! Oh nevermind, already been discussed.

~sigh~

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I think we should make a selection option for "free" and "unfree" that's based on whether the MUD is 100% open source. Never mind this "free as in beer" nonsense.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I guess I should not be surprised that this argument is still going, but somehow I am. I see we are still arguing about the countless different meanings of vague phrases like "rewarded in game" or "results in game." Both phrases are equally vague and in the long run, worthless, ambiguous flame fodder. Occasionally someone hilariously suggests the terms are NOT vague, despite the hundreds of posts preceding theirs with examples going in every direction possible.

But I honestly thought the whole idea was invalidated for good when Valg admitted his purely personal motive that has little to do with "educating players":

That admission right there pretty much killed the whole idea. I said all along I thought there was a personal motive behind this, and that some admins were hoping to change the system to benefit their mud at the expense of others. I was roundly criticized for making such a "ridiculous" claim. Turns out it wasn't so ridiculous after all. Valg got a little carried away and spilled the beans. Or maybe he just got tired of dancing around the issue and pretending.

So aside from the fact that every proposed set of options beyond takes money/doesn't take money is hopelessly vague, isn't it time the whole ugly argument finally died?

I mean, now that we know the whole movement was about gaining personal advantage over other muds and not about informing players, isn't it just done?

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

I think you are just about the only one still 'discussing' this.
Most us others are just waiting for the system to be implemented.

And please stop applying 'personal motives' to other posters.
If you want to talk about personal motives, stick to your own, since they are the only ones you know anything about.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

A claim can be both sensible and something personally valuable to me. Actually, if you follow my claims, the system is useful to me precisely because it is useful to a searcher, and therefore a good utility for the site. The current system makes no distinction among the vast majority of TMS's games.

If you plan to continue posting in this thread, I suggest you address the merits of the idea, rather than repeatedly and directly attacking my character.

You keep insisting on calling the four-box system "hopelessly vague", but you have failed to respond to the request of providing an example of an actual MUD that is difficult to characterize. KaVir and others have categorized various games, and I've yet to see a disagreement between any two posters about what boxes a specific MUD should check. The empirical evidence suggests that your claims are false-- the system is both necessary and sufficient to more finely distinguish among TMS's MUDs.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

2, 4, 6, 8, The two box system is the best to date! GoooooooOOOOOO Two BOX! (with options).
--Brought to you by, two box for a better world. Restrictions apply. Availability may be limited. Not sold with any other offer.

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

Well, it enjoys the universal support of people who keep repeating the same arguments as if they haven't been refuted and persistently use tactics that would get you thrown out of any high school debate club, like claiming that everyone has the choice of either supporting your position or being a <censored by GodwinsLawBot v0.9a; your thread longevity is our business!>.

So I guess that's, uh, a metric of some kind of "goodness" in some kind of universe.

I probably need to reread the thread, because at this point I can't actually recall any of the anti-four-box-plus-text sentiment translating as anything but "<stompystomp> if you try to make it so I can't say my pay-for-foo-bar-and-baz game is exactly as free as anyone else's, I'll ruin your pay/free distinction some other way, so THERE! <stompystomp>"

Re: What does "Free" Mean?
 

By the same rationale then, I figure you are therefore advocating for the removal of (or at least some distillation down to concrete terms, if possible of):

Originality: How "original" is original? What is "mostly"?

RP: What is "RP"? (Some people think that RP needs deep-seated personality development, others think that just not bringing up Harry Potter is good enough :) ) What is "Encouraged"? What is "Mandatory"? (In other words, what is the enforcement mechanism?)

Avg players online: I've seen games with 60 during the day, 2 at night. Is this 30? Is this players or characters? (Multiplaying can affect this, my MUSH allows for 2 alts and 1 feature, plus temporary NPCs, others allow more, or less). Plus staff can play characters, features, and NPCs.

In an earlier reply, you stated that once money changes hands, the entire relationship changes. Do you feel this way in general, or just in gaming? After all, I get solicitations for donations all the time for local firefighters and police, and schools often send out there kids to collect money through magazine and other sales. Hmm, is my church "rewarded or not rewarded in life?" Maybe you do have a point there ;)