Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The future of mmos is rental servers.

2456

Comments

  • CuddleheartCuddleheart Member UncommonPosts: 341
    Straight up mmorpg.com...your community members are the legit worst...
    Champie
  • RungarRungar Member RarePosts: 478
    Rungar said:
    right now on steam i have a messenger, voice chat, all my games automatically update as needed and i can easily connect to games with other people on steam or even watch their games. 

    its only a matter of time before they add server space to this platform.  All you'll have to do is "start/restart" if you have the game and space rented. Its just a way to make smaller games persistent without all the hassles for the player. 
     
    There is big money in this so it will be done. 
    So you use the word "rental" as in a person or individual is paying for it. 

    You would expect Steam or other major company to be a go-between for this RENTAL PERSON and other players, and expect steam to coordinate all these efforts and manage every anomaly involved with it.

    Add that every individual game would have it's own non-standard way of providing servers, and steam will tailor their services to cater to each game ?


    Again,
    Who will pay steam for this service ?  
    Will they sign a contract so they don't back out of this service. 


    Their are a million holes in this idea.... AND FOR WHAT ?.... How does this benefit anyone ? 
    It literally benefits everyone. 

    steam gets more money
    players can access streamlined services
    developers can focus on their games and content rather than hardware issues
    More small developers will be able to access mmo space. Maybe not 1000's of players but maybe 100's. 
    players get more worlds on offer rather than a game every 10 years. 
    Smaller worlds dont have to suffer scalability of feature problems. 

    Like others have said, its happening now, so its only a matter of time before its integrated to one of these platforms.  
    mmolouChampieGdemami
    .33 of a second to midnight
  • ChampieChampie Member UncommonPosts: 14
    edited May 3
    I think the OP has been listening to too much Raph Koster without understanding a single word of it.
    Gdemami
  • lonesollonesol Member UncommonPosts: 24
     If you counted up the players from days, conan, roblox, minecraft, and the rest of those games, you would find out they dwarf the mmorpgs. 
    RungarSensai
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,447
    How much would the person be able to mod the games?  

    I'm not sure where the topic is heading.  I presume it can go from a click of a few button to set server rule to full game editor which let people to change everything.  


  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,756
    edited May 3
    Rungar said:
    The worst idea yet !!!

    Put the burden of populations in ONE PERSONS HANDS. 

    Who will pay the bills ?.... Will this player always pay the bill ?
    How does he charge, paypal ?
    How will he advertise to get 1,000 players to join his server ?
    How does he prove his server is reliable to strangers ?
    How does he deal with one or more assholes ?
    When the population drops, how does he re-advertise ?
    How does he distribute his code ?
    Can other people keep the code a secret ?

    For the OP... Think before making a topic !





    i guess what i'm trying to say is that mmos don't really have a much of a future, based on current development. Smaller and easier to develop ( with better features) multiplayer games ~200 players does. 

    All that's required to go in this direction is a large "storefront" company like microsoft or steam to provide automated hosting services and a company like unity to improve their network handling a bit. 

    Im not saying I necessarily like that but mmos have stagnated and failed. The lack of real development is proof of this. They have gone into the abyss way ahead of the rest of us.

    It's also worth mentioning that small teams are already doing this with large private servers of known MMORPGs... so it's definitely doable, and with good performance too.

    I don't agree that MMOs have stagnated and failed though, the good ones are still going strong.

    But delete telling someone to "think before making a topic", that is priceless, and it was worth creating this thread just for that alone. I owe you one, OP ;)
    RungarScotTorvalIselinSovrathSandmanjwVermillion_Raventhal
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 10700k (5.10ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z490 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • StizzledStizzled Member RarePosts: 2,110
    Agreed, I've thought the same for years now. I could see developers providing a base game where groups of players or other developers license use of the game code and then do what they want with it.

    Base game, modded, classic, plenty of options would spring up. Subscription based, cash shop, buy to play, whatever works for each server and allows them to continue to pay for the licensing.

    The big sticking point, to me, when talking about using this setup in a true MMO is the longevity of each server. Undoubtedly, many would live short lives, especially those ran by amateur groups. MMO's are things meant to be played for years, it's hard to get into one if you cant find a server you trust in.
    RexKushmanGdemamiVermillion_Raventhal
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 15,058
    edited May 3
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.
    RexKushmanMendelGdemami
  • RexKushmanRexKushman Member RarePosts: 621
    Taking a look at the played time on my steam games over the last 7+ years shows that I've already made the switch to private server games. Rust, Ark, Atlas, 7 Days 2 Die, Valheim, Conan Exiles in order of most to least hours played.. with Rust up near 3k hrs. I prefer the freedom of choosing between tons of different types of servers as opposed to 1 static ruleset.

     And the smaller player base on each server is a huge bonus to me, frankly most gamers these days quickly out themselves as absolutely useless scumbags in game so I prefer to not associate with many of them.

    There will of course always be an audience for the larger scale games like WoW, ESO etc.., but the days of new games like that being developed are just about over.
    RungarGdemami

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,277
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    Jean-Luc_PicardGdemamiSandmanjw
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,480
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.

    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.



    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,277
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.

    How is this any different from current server rentals with survival types? Users don't upload the server side components. They rent access to use the server or cloud service (e.g. G-Portal) provided by the hosting provider. Often there are limited slots for specific games as well.

    Generally speaking you can only install what the provider allows to be installed. This is why most legit game services don't allow you to just rent a Linux/Windows server and install anything you want.
    RungarSandmanjw
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • RungarRungar Member RarePosts: 478
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.

    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.



    It actually prevents what you say because you have to have the game on that platform to play.  How can you rent a server from steam but not own the game or have a steam account? 


    Champie
    .33 of a second to midnight
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 5,667
    Kyleran said:
    What I think we'll see is in five years is the "big six" or so MMORPGS will still be the dominant players in their space.

    There really isn't many promising games on the near horizon unless one of the many asian games in development becomes a surprise hit.

    Possible sure, but unlikely to appeal to me regardless.

    I also see myself playing smaller MMO alikes such as FO76 and such but not on private or rental servers, I prefer more stable management and service.

    I tend to agree with you, that it will be just a few major players in the MMO landscape, especially given how hard Crowfunded MMO's have tanked.

    I don't think it will be the same "Big" Six however. I think there will be some change over, and while I doubt WoW will cease to be a contender, the population of MMO players as a we know them, is not growing, and no doubt, within the next 6 years, given the recent jumps in VR, I wager MMO's will become more more aligned to Virtual Worlds, to attract the net gen of players, no doubt with integrated to phones or other mobile devices, so that players can just, at a glance, check on their in-game situations or progress, as it where.
    Mendel
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,480
    Torval said:
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.

    How is this any different from current server rentals with survival types? Users don't upload the server side components. They rent access to use the server or cloud service (e.g. G-Portal) provided by the hosting provider. Often there are limited slots for specific games as well.

    Generally speaking you can only install what the provider allows to be installed. This is why most legit game services don't allow you to just rent a Linux/Windows server and install anything you want.

    Most rentals currently are game specific.  The publisher 'sells' the ability to create a 'private' server.  Conan Exiles is an example.  You can't really operate CE from any server except one that Funcom provides.



    Gdemami

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • RungarRungar Member RarePosts: 478
    Torval said:
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.

    How is this any different from current server rentals with survival types? Users don't upload the server side components. They rent access to use the server or cloud service (e.g. G-Portal) provided by the hosting provider. Often there are limited slots for specific games as well.

    Generally speaking you can only install what the provider allows to be installed. This is why most legit game services don't allow you to just rent a Linux/Windows server and install anything you want.
    The thing about gportal and other providers is that it is a step too far for many players. Steam or microsoft offering the exact same thing for games in their platform will yield different results especially if its seamless integration.  

     
    GdemamiChampieRexKushman
    .33 of a second to midnight
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,277
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Mendel said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    My short answer would be: liability.  A server service could be entangled in legal actions if a 'pirate' server were to appear on their service and the legal owner decided to take action.

    Could do is one thing; should do is another.

    How is this any different from current server rentals with survival types? Users don't upload the server side components. They rent access to use the server or cloud service (e.g. G-Portal) provided by the hosting provider. Often there are limited slots for specific games as well.

    Generally speaking you can only install what the provider allows to be installed. This is why most legit game services don't allow you to just rent a Linux/Windows server and install anything you want.
    Most rentals currently are game specific.  The publisher 'sells' the ability to create a 'private' server.  Conan Exiles is an example.  You can't really operate CE from any server except one that Funcom provides.

    I'm not following. This would still be game specific. If a studio doesn't want to allow their game to be published on a hosting facility or offered their their publisher or distribution platform then it wouldn't be availab.e

    Conan Exiles can be hosted publicly on my local hardware, a generic server I rent and configure myself, or a hosting service just like ARK. Players can also join officially hosted servers.

    Funcom doesn't really care where it's hosted because they don't charge for server access. They charge for the base game and the DLC. Anyone joining a Conan Exiles server that runs content also needs to own that content.

    The big advantage of a hosting service setting this up is they are responsible for the initial deployment configuration. You're paying them to set this stuff up for you.

    Absolutely the studio and publisher would need to be on board. This isn't a pro pirate pitch. This is me saying there is a huge market for private hosting. MMOs could definitely get on board with this if they wanted to. If not other genres, like survival types, will fill vacancy.
    SandmanjwRexKushman
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,277
    Rungar said:
    The thing about gportal and other providers is that it is a step too far for many players. Steam or microsoft offering the exact same thing for games in their platform will yield different results especially if its seamless integration. 
    For some people that's true. Both Microsoft and third party hosting services offer Minecraft servers for rent. The Microsoft offering is easier. The third party services are more flexible. I think there is room for both types of offerings.

    Now I'm more interested in service games that offer a self-hosting option than I am publisher only restricted hosting. Not that I won't play one of those, but I'm more like to play and buy a game that isn't as restrictive. I don't need to worry if and when they'll shut down their services.
    rojoArcueidGdemamiRexKushman
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 5,667
    Ok, I have been reading this, and to be honest, the idea of playing on someone elese modded server, as far as an MMO goes, does not appeal to me directly. In fact, for games that did have hosted servers, I always looked to play on the official servers only.

    There are several reasons for this, the main one being that if I am playing a Modded Game, as far as an MMO goes, I don't feel like I am playing a fair game with the other people playing the same game as I am, where everyone has the same rules by which they follow, this means that if the server I am on shuts down, I may or may not be able to move to another server, and all my work and progress gets lost.

    I mean this could work for some games, but ideally as far as MMO's go, where the carrot of the game, is progress, the idea of just losing all your time investment if the hosts shuts down the server, is not a gamble I, personally, would take.

    Which again, is why I seek to only play on official servers.

    I suppose if I was looking to just screw around with some friends, and do some modded stuff, I would get involved, but really, I don't think I could ever get seriously into something that is that unstable.

    But that is me, not to say this idea won't happen, just, I have my issues with it.
    Mendel
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • DarkEvilHatredDarkEvilHatred Member UncommonPosts: 198
    The future of MMO's is what, we, the players, support and pay for! If we don't like or want it, it will fail, no matter what it is.
    delete5230Scot
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,447
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.



    Many people just rather play on an official professional maintained server which runs forever.

    It probably more psychology than anything.  You see people who say they spend thousands of hours playing survival game. But the difference is they jump server to server and drift between various games.  And there are mmorpg players who play a single game on a single server for thousands of hours.  

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,277
    edited May 4
    No servers last forever. Can't login to Everfrost on EQ2. Can't login to Nimrodel on LotRO. Can't login to Lands of Aden in Western Lineage. Can't login to anything on Marvel Heroes, Wildstar, and several other MMOs. I agree official MMO servers are usually run a lot better than pirate servers, but I think officially supported private servers could be a quality offering too. Survival type games have shown that.

    While I do like to mod rulesets to my groups liking, it's more about playing with my friends and maybe friends of friends. I would love to play on my own private EQ2, Rift, or LotRO server with just my friends and some acquaintances.

    I'm much less interested in playing with massive amounts of strangers than I am playing with those friends and acquaintances.
    GdemamiRexKushman
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • RungarRungar Member RarePosts: 478
    Torval said:
    No servers last forever. Can't login to Everfrost on EQ2. Can't login to Nimrodel on LotRO. Can't login to Lands of Aden in Western Lineage. Can't login to anything on Marvel Heroes, Wildstar, and several other MMOs. I agree official MMO servers are usually run a lot better than pirate servers, but I think officially supported private servers could be a quality offering too. Survival type games have shown that.

    While I do like to mod rulesets to my groups liking, it's more about playing with my friends and maybe friends of friends. I would love to play on my own private EQ2, Rift, or LotRO server with just my friends and some acquaintances.

    I'm much less interested in playing with massive amounts of strangers than I am playing with those friends and acquaintances.
    I can see a platform hosting a number of public 'official" servers as well as private ones and you can pretty much choose how you want to play. The only requirement to keep a game going then is your willingness to pay for it. 

    The public ones have certain advantages and the private version has other advantages. Both can exist at the same time. 

    Like yourself i think there are many that just want to play with friends and need tools to keep the asshats, cheaters and retards at bay. 




    GdemamiChampieRexKushman
    .33 of a second to midnight
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 15,058
    edited May 4
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rungar has been coming up with various interesting ideas, so he did not get this of Koster. I did smile when I saw Delete say that, as his own thread fire from the hip, but I more or less agree with Delete on this, downside of rental is too heavy regardless of any benefits.

    Hard to remember now but nearly 20 years ago I was playing multiplayer on a hardly legal GTA server before GTA had multiplayer. Those guys could get over 50 people playing together, I am not sure things need to be that small these days.

    What are these heavy downsides and why? I haven't seen a good argument yet or a list of reasons why this isn't realistic.

    First, we already have a mature ecosystem of hosting providers and self-run servers for medium concurrency games like ARK, Conan, 7 Days, and many other MMOs (medium multiplayer online) games. We have both hosts and users experienced with running server side technology.

    Next, we have a long history of "pirate" servers running massive concurrency games like Vanilla WoW, EQ, SWG, Lineage, and many others. With hosting providers and large publishers providing infrastructure this should be even more approachable to those already comfortable running survival types.

    Microsoft already provides easy out of the box Minecraft multiplayer servers in addition to generic hosting providers. Guilds like The Old Timers and other large clubs we see advertise here periodically could easily afford and run one of these.
    It splits the play base and often leads to a small player base by default. We could do similar to this twenty years ago so I can't see how it is the future. It may come to be, but if so I would regard it as a defeat of anyone who wants a really large player base in a fully fledged MMORPG world.

    What is the end game with rental servers? We all game in a bubble of people like us? I do that in my guild, but out of necessity not choice. The largest possible population built with PvE/PvP zones,factions and every bell and whistle is what we should be aiming for.

    As a possibility, a MMORPG that has a zone which is No Country For Old Timers and a zone that is The Old Timers is what we want if going down this line. With the ability to take our avatar to areas of different styles of play. But that would be tricky to do and this still may create bubbles of play so I am not sure it is counterproductive to the creation of a in game world community.
  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,082
    Rungar said:
    The public ones have certain advantages and the private version has other advantages. Both can exist at the same time. 





    Some really interesting ideas. From a publisher's perspective, it might make a lot of sense, especially if players on private servers still need to pay a subscription. You'd be charging for all the subscriptions + server rent costs (essentially double charging people really). A bit like Fallout 76 does it.

    I do wonder:
    • What would this do to micro-transactions? Would players be less likely to buy one if the private server can mod the ruleset and add customization in other ways?

    • What would this do to player retention? From one point of view it could improve retention, I am guessing playing with a tight knit group of people makes you less likely to quit. At the same time, if your private server dies (and a huge % of them do), what are the chances of the player leaving the game entirely? This is in contrast to your group leaving on a public server, where presumably the chance of you still staying and meeting others is higher than the whole server dying.

    • Most importantly, what would this do to the sense of pride and accomplishment (EA please don't sue me). Seriously though, I think the major difference between a MMO and a survival game (e.g. ARK / Minecraft) is the fact that you earn stuff within a larger ecosystem of players. You are trying to "show off" in a sense, which makes it fun and keeps people progressing / playing. What would happen if there are thousands of servers with no centralised pool of progression? It might kill the whole spirit of an MMO. One solution would be to have joint progression across the private servers, but this would likely limit the amount of flexibility/customisation offered. 
    MendelScottzervo
Sign In or Register to comment.