Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post - Pay-to-Play vs. Pay-to-Advance

Valg · 06-01-2005, 04:02 PM

1) Hardestadt has previously identified himself as CTO for a Rapture-based MUD, which is a license proprietary to IRE. I don't have your org chart or anything, but he seems like at least a business partner to IRE. Such a connection means a vested interest in defending the Pay-for-Perks model. You can nitpick technicalities, but he's not Joe Citizen either. (Nor am I, but I clearly identify my ties in my sig.)

2) In this thread, you're claiming that Pay-for-Perks is superior to a free or subscription system, precisely because it allows a player a way to accelerate their in-game development without spending time playing the game. More options, therefore more enjoyment. My question stands: If Pay-for-Perks is such a superior model, why denote IRE's MUDs as "free", instead of loudly trumpeting them as "Pay-for-Perks"?

06-01-2005, 04:02 PM	#81
Valg Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Home MUD: Carrion Fields Posts: 643	1) Hardestadt has previously identified himself as CTO for a Rapture-based MUD, which is a license proprietary to IRE. I don't have your org chart or anything, but he seems like at least a business partner to IRE. Such a connection means a vested interest in defending the Pay-for-Perks model. You can nitpick technicalities, but he's not Joe Citizen either. (Nor am I, but I clearly identify my ties in my sig.) 2) In this thread, you're claiming that Pay-for-Perks is superior to a free or subscription system, precisely because it allows a player a way to accelerate their in-game development without spending time playing the game. More options, therefore more enjoyment. My question stands: If Pay-for-Perks is such a superior model, why denote IRE's MUDs as "free", instead of loudly trumpeting them as "Pay-for-Perks"?