Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Hadoryu · 01-09-2006, 07:17 AM

It's actually both. There are items and such that can only be bought with credits, however you can buy credits for gold. This was relevant to the notion that people who buy credits are avoiding the competition for limited resources which isn't true because credits can not be used to 'generate' such resources but instead to only buy some unique items and skills.

You're right, there probably are players like that. The difference is this - they have to do something or to have someone pay for them to play. In IRE that isn't the case, because playing is free. No player has to pay anything for you to play.

I was rather speaking of the example you gave of someone just making new accounts every month.

If you can get someone to pay your subscription for you, more power to you. Your playing time still has to be paid for, which isn't the case with IRE games.

Hence my comment that most MUDs out there support a pay-for-perks subculture of some sort. You can consistently buy credits from the credit market - a game feature which is fueled by player bought credits. Yes. I'm going to get back to this poit shortly. (*)

You don't have to pay to make your character stronger. You don't have to pay to play. If you don't pay money, it will take an investment of time to develop the character.

I think we're mixing up two discussions at this point. One seems to be 'Pay-for-perks MUDs can't be free' and the other is 'the playing field isn't levelled in pay-for-perks MUDs'. Here is where I return to my previous point (*). IRE games are free to play. They are pay-for-perks, but free to play. They are free to play in the meaning of the word where you're not expected to have to pay money. You, nor anyone else, has to pay for you to play an IRE game. That is a different issue from the issue about the 'fairness' of the game.

Your last quote addresses the fairness of the game and isn't connected to the fact that you can play for free. If somebody invests more money than you in an IRE game, they will have an advantage over you. Analogically, if someone invests more time than you in an IRE game (or in most other MUDs), they will have an advantage over you. The pay-for-perks model allows time to be substituted with money. Credits aren't 'free' in the full sense of the word, but you can get them by investing your time instead of your money. If you don't buy credits in an IRE game and wish to compete in PvP, you're going to have to invest a significantly larger amount of time gathering gold to buy credits with than somebody who has simply bought them with money. The question isn't IF you can continue to advance in the game, it's HOW you can advance in the game.

The question isn't if you'd call them 'pay-for-perks', but if you'd call them 'free', and it makes no difference to that distinction whether they get bonuses from donating.

01-09-2006, 07:17 AM	#258
Hadoryu Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 102	It's actually both. There are items and such that can only be bought with credits, however you can buy credits for gold. This was relevant to the notion that people who buy credits are avoiding the competition for limited resources which isn't true because credits can not be used to 'generate' such resources but instead to only buy some unique items and skills. You're right, there probably are players like that. The difference is this - they have to do something or to have someone pay for them to play. In IRE that isn't the case, because playing is free. No player has to pay anything for you to play. I was rather speaking of the example you gave of someone just making new accounts every month. If you can get someone to pay your subscription for you, more power to you. Your playing time still has to be paid for, which isn't the case with IRE games. Hence my comment that most MUDs out there support a pay-for-perks subculture of some sort. You can consistently buy credits from the credit market - a game feature which is fueled by player bought credits. Yes. I'm going to get back to this poit shortly. () You don't have to pay to make your character stronger. You don't have to pay to play. If you don't pay money, it will take an investment of time to develop the character. I think we're mixing up two discussions at this point. One seems to be 'Pay-for-perks MUDs can't be free' and the other is 'the playing field isn't levelled in pay-for-perks MUDs'. Here is where I return to my previous point (). IRE games are free to play. They are pay-for-perks, but free to play. They are free to play in the meaning of the word where you're not expected to have to pay money. You, nor anyone else, has to pay for you to play an IRE game. That is a different issue from the issue about the 'fairness' of the game. Your last quote addresses the fairness of the game and isn't connected to the fact that you can play for free. If somebody invests more money than you in an IRE game, they will have an advantage over you. Analogically, if someone invests more time than you in an IRE game (or in most other MUDs), they will have an advantage over you. The pay-for-perks model allows time to be substituted with money. Credits aren't 'free' in the full sense of the word, but you can get them by investing your time instead of your money. If you don't buy credits in an IRE game and wish to compete in PvP, you're going to have to invest a significantly larger amount of time gathering gold to buy credits with than somebody who has simply bought them with money. The question isn't IF you can continue to advance in the game, it's HOW you can advance in the game. The question isn't if you'd call them 'pay-for-perks', but if you'd call them 'free', and it makes no difference to that distinction whether they get bonuses from donating.