Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Spoke · 01-09-2006, 10:35 AM

I invite you to visit a Carrion Fields , in it you will find a free game that compares itself with the $50 latest game in the computer store shelves to encourage players to pledge money for covering the running costs of the MUD. It also clearly states that for 10 years a convination of IMM and players has contributed to keep the MUD running (by pledging money to a free game they enjoy). There are options to buy game-design RL items and also another to buy character sheets that appear in the MUD forums (a resource widely used by players that I would guess would let you have bragging rights for your success with previous characters).

A more direct quote goes like which is pretty much the reality for any game good enough to have a numerous player base that would not be posibly held in a free server (and probably no game with 10 yrs history has been always on a free server either).

Now, my question is, if it is totally okay for this specific game to claim to be free, 100% free and free to play, yet they do require monetary support from the player base and they do request this monetary support (as per their wording in the above link); why cannot a game that can be effectibly played for free, without money investment on an specific character but that requires someone else (among the player base) to spend money (in this case on themselves) be called free to play?

Would you be willing to accept the idea that both types of MUDs would then fall into the cathegory of "not free" then? what would be a free game with a high quality then? that run by a multi-millionaire who puts all the money by himself, covers bandwidth costs, etc and gets all the job done by himself or via pledged time of IMM staff? If you are willing to accept this then go ahead, label those games described above differently, it wont change anything because all the first page and many beyond will be of either type anyway.

01-09-2006, 10:35 AM	#268
Spoke Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 101	I invite you to visit a Carrion Fields , in it you will find a free game that compares itself with the $50 latest game in the computer store shelves to encourage players to pledge money for covering the running costs of the MUD. It also clearly states that for 10 years a convination of IMM and players has contributed to keep the MUD running (by pledging money to a free game they enjoy). There are options to buy game-design RL items and also another to buy character sheets that appear in the MUD forums (a resource widely used by players that I would guess would let you have bragging rights for your success with previous characters). A more direct quote goes like which is pretty much the reality for any game good enough to have a numerous player base that would not be posibly held in a free server (and probably no game with 10 yrs history has been always on a free server either). Now, my question is, if it is totally okay for this specific game to claim to be free, 100% free and free to play, yet they do require monetary support from the player base and they do request this monetary support (as per their wording in the above link); why cannot a game that can be effectibly played for free, without money investment on an specific character but that requires someone else (among the player base) to spend money (in this case on themselves) be called free to play? Would you be willing to accept the idea that both types of MUDs would then fall into the cathegory of "not free" then? what would be a free game with a high quality then? that run by a multi-millionaire who puts all the money by himself, covers bandwidth costs, etc and gets all the job done by himself or via pledged time of IMM staff? If you are willing to accept this then go ahead, label those games described above differently, it wont change anything because all the first page and many beyond will be of either type anyway.