I dunno... I agree in the general sense that people take this way too seriously, but at the same time, I see the following points:

1) Advertising another game inside of someone else's is rather rude... Especially since it often comes with the implied "instead"... As in, "If you like this game, you should try [blank] instead" No matter how carefully or politely it is worded, it still comes with that implication...

2) This is a competitive market... If someone is urging people to play another game, then that is potentially taking away your "profits"... Wal*Mart doesn't allow people from rival stores to come into their buildings and put up flyers, now do they? The only difference, really, is that almighty Time is the commodity here, rather than the traditional Money, but regardless, there is still a competition for a limited resource from "customers"... Most players won't be playing two or more similar games, they'll choose one and play it to the exclusion of others like it (or even all others, if said game takes enough f their Time)... If they're already in yours, they've either already made their choice, or they just don't know the alternatives... You've got to keep the latter group from discovering the alternatives, or you risk losing them...

You know what I hate? The double standard that goes on with certain games about this type of thing. Say Game A sends out a few of its people to other games to advertise their game to and get them to come. Let's say in Game F, the advertiser gets out 4 sentences of quick succession spam before being muted. (But that's all) One of the players in Game F doesn't really care about Game A but decides if they're willing to advertise elsewhere, they won't mind advertisers on their game, right? The player from Game F goes to Game A, and advertises without spamming. Within 5 seconds, multiple people in Game A cry out 'Ban!', 'Ban him!', 'shut up fag', etc.

I mean, if you're willing to try to pull away other game's players, you shouldn't mind having people try to pull yours away either.

So... what are you saying? You want us to pager-ban you for spamming and bashing and advertising games?

If there's a rule put in place that says not to advertise, then yes that sort of ban is completely warranted. Whether or not you* agree with it, you'd still be breaking a game rule. I could make a rule in my hypothetical game that says "Don't put the letter J in your character name or you'll be banned" and then carry it out if I saw anybody using a J in their name. It'd be an immensely stupid rule, but that doesn't mean it's no longer in place. Someone would be better off trying to appeal to get the rule removed or to just play a different game, because thinking "this rule is stupid so I'm not going to follow it" and then claiming that being banned for it is unfair is just a waste of everyone's time.

And in my game, I could place a rule stating that everyone has to use a close-up photo of a child's bare genitals or be banned. Does that mean that the rule should be appealed instead of the game being ignored, deleted and me arrested for promoting child pornography?

Tiberath wrote:

And in my game, I could place a rule stating that everyone has to use a close-up photo of a child's bare genitals or be banned. Does that mean that the rule should be appealed instead of the game being ignored, deleted and me arrested for promoting child pornography?

What in the holy fuck. I see it right here, but I still can't believe you wrote this. I'd be embarrassed for writing this if I were you.

Okay, going off of your example, yes someone should be arrested if he promoted and required people to share child pornography. Can you explain to me how breaking a law is on the same level as advertising or the letter J?

I like to call it "intershock!" Where I completely say something out of character, using one of the harshest things I can and try and use it in an example. Although it is in bad taste.

Ignore the fact that the situation of my argument is a capital crime. Focus only on the games rule itself. It's a popular game, everyone loves the concept, and I'm the only one who's able to perfect it. Then I put that rule into play. It's an insane rule, just like banning someone for suggesting people have a look at another game.

Consider this, I'm in NBOLTS or WOTS or whatever the devil it is you children are playing these days, and I shout something like "has anyone tried out 'Laser Wars'" and I get banned for it. Now, the ban is unjust because I'm in theory, not advertising it (but it still would go against the rules of advertisement) I'm just mentioning another game of a completely different genre. Even if the game has a rule which states that advertising isn't allowed, they will still ban people for the mere discussion of another game.

And because I've lost myself in my own argument above and not sure where I'm heading. I'm going out on a whim. Say the game creator has a rule which states the host must forfeit all power to the game owner. According to your idea, the rule must be in play, because it's a games rule. But in saying that, you'll have all the "hosts computer, hosts way" people in here, bitching that it's an unjust rule. How does that play out as fair?

I don't think you would get banned for "playing lazer wars".

People talk about Naruto GOA more in WOTS than WOTS itself. Hell, I plan on playing the game too.

BOTLS's GM's are determined apon what level/rank they are, so thats not too suprising if they banned you for it.

Well, I think you've got the term slightly mixed up here. There is recommendation, and there's advertisement. To recommend, is, say, log in for the purpose of playing the game, and then advise players to play game X, which happens to be similar to this one, and quite fun. That, I have no problem with. The player recommends another game for the players to enjoy, like in an advertisement, but he did not log in for the sole reason of doing that. That, I consider a decent player, and not an advertiser. However, if another person logs in to the game for the sole reason of advertising, as politely as it is done, that's just spam. Consider this:

John logs in.
<John> "Hi, this game is quite fun!"
<John> "You should try this game, too!"
John logs out.

That, I consider, is spam. It is competition, but which competition is it, if another community ruins your game with that nuisance while forcing players to play their own? While John did nothing rude or impolite, he logged in for the sole reason of advertising his game. I severely doubt you, as the owner of the game, would believe that to be fair competition.