Assume I've made a (hypothetical) online game where you equip two cats that rule small feifdoms, and they fight each other. I haven't done this! It's just an example. But say I did this, and I wanted to put my online game, well, online.
Here's the thing: I have one name, say "Feline Fighters," that works okay. And www.felinefighters.com is an available URL. I book it.
Then I get to thinking: some day I'd like to expand the game out to more than just cats fighting; maybe you can have fighting dogs and hamsters and monkeys. So I need a better, less restrictive name.
And it would be better to start building that name right now, rather than have just Feline Fighters built up and then have to contend with a whole name change.
So after lots of thought, there's only one name that really rings right in my ears: Wild Kingdoms. It's the perfect name! But when I look into wildkingdoms.com, it's been squatted on by somebody that wants $10K for the name. Ditto wildkingdom.com, wild-kingdom.com, wild-kingdoms.com, wildkingdomgame.com, wildkingdomsonline.com, and so on and so on for all the obvious variants.
(again, I stress that this is just an example and I'm not looking for other site names. There may well be real sites and no squatters. This is all hypothetical.)
So the question is: is it better to have a short, memorable but objectively "worse" name that comes with a great URL (felinefighters.com), or a better name, even if that means having a long, clunky or ackward URL (thewildkingdomsgameonline.com)?
Is there a conventional wisdom about whether a great name is "worth" a poor URL, or if a great URL is justified by a suboptimal name?