.....and what would you say if F.D. said: OK, but it will be £10 per day to use said server?interesting. i could see it being a problem if the trial past, and an optional service was provided for a smoother instance... and if players stop paying... that could cause issue. But i cant see how that would swing much power over Fdeve.. apart from its an embarrassment if it fails
I would guess if it was implemented, they would try and recoup setup cost with 2 years if not less (a guess) and if no one is using it , just cutting the service is an option (hehe, like when people call to remove CQC, but its still here..i don't get it)
Time to trial it? (Subscription users)
- Thread starter Sooden
- Start date
i would say... 'nah, i gonna save that cash and get myself some strawmen'
You are full of the sly insults.
Sorry any valid arguments you had, have just gone out the window.
So how much per day; is your limit?
Last edited:
Stupid idea is stupid. No. Nope. Etc.
and what is the idea i have put forward? maybe if we are on the same 'page' i can see your point of view and rethink my ideas.
I know we just met and all, but i'm sure you are a fine person... and i should just take what you say and run with it... after all, you took the time to post
I hope there's more to that assertion than "more money = faster, bug-free code" because in general the history of the software industry does not back it up. If you need a prime example of how a vast amount of cash does not automatically lead to a more viable product, you need only to glance across the street at The Space Game That Shall Not Be Named.
In fact (and I admit this paragraph is all pure speculation on my part) given ED's rushed launch and particularly patchy development history I would hazard a guess that a sudden injection of new personnel into the project could actually cause more problems than it solved, at least in the short term, as the new talent played catch-up with the legacy code. Besides, looking at their financial history I don't think cashflow is one of FD's concerns. If money was the solution to ED's issues they would have been resolved long ago.
Of course I could be wrong, and a regular flow into the coffers might be the answer. But if it was, it would be the exception rather than the rule.
We already touch on this subject... so if i react to a silly question such as ''OK, but it will be £10 per day to use said server?'' with a witty put-down, i think that's fair
We know 10 pound a day is silly and will never be trialled to the player, you know that as well. this was nothing more but to get me into an argument and look for holes. And you seem in on it. This is called baiting.
So, why would you ask me what my limit per day is... first, most people talk monthly. i also addressed this is passing but some people here seem not to be taking part in the thread, but just looking to fight. Sad... still here we go
was can assume from that post that 5 or 3 a month is a fair price... but can it be done for that, who knows. I have answered your question, in more clear terms. but the question '' but it will be £10 per day'' is a bait, as i stated ''.. and even though someone already trying to poo-poo the idea on cost tenner a month''. hope that helps
Some people have had me quote my posts several times now, to show i have already addressed a point. What is the reason? This cant be fair discussion... can it? asking again and again?
There should be a list this long of things to consider before starting a new thread:
....mmh... No?
Important notes before you continue
-I know Fdev chose Cosmetics over Subscription
-I understand this causes an issue with Life time passes
-I know not everyone has cash
-I know it’s less scalable than P2P
-know this has been discussed over and over.
-Don’t just post ‘No’ in this thread, it’s not smart, it’s not cleaver, its spam.- I’m not saying force a subscription service
-I’m not saying remove the P2P system
-I am hinting at a server based mode (open) for subscriber. Allowing for more stable , predictable instancing, as an option.-I understand that it could cause issues with others platforms and how that would work… I dint care
-I understand it would be a huge investment of time and resources for Fdev, but would it be worth it? Would it make Elite shine?
-And the risks of a trail are – If it not used, then fDev have lost time and resources, that’s cash! and now they have dead code they gotta rip out. I know it not just an easy thing to do.
-also, I understand this would put none-open modes at a disadvantage with connectivity but hay
....mmh... No?
yup, i'm still up in the air about the split. could be an issue, will take time for my head to really mull it over.
As for Elsa and Anna, the can just... I kid
If they have no issue in P2P, then they stay in p2p. I know what your saying... if one had already chosen to get the service and the other dose'nt want too. always the offer of gifting a month sub or something. see if they like it, all the same account - and will be fine if it goes back to P2P only. but i wondering if there is enough of a call for such a service for people that want the bigger groups in one instance... having the mega battle, maybe getting thier squadron from around the world into one instance (within limit)
Could not see it benefiting such a small group as Elsa and Anna, if Anna was not in need of such a service (or willing). really aimed at the groups that would like to see big groups.
Thank for the post, does give me something to think about
Added: i guess the main point of the service is, the people thta want it are already kinda separated from the players they want to be with, cus of instancing
Last edited:
and one about posting ?
Why no, it optional, and if you don't want it, you don't buy it.
because you don't like it, you say no... is that for you, or for all.. even them that may want it.
I wouldn't have to ask if you had posted a little bit more, than your edgy '....mmh... No?'
coming in here a dissin' my thread yo!
OK, what would be your limit per month? Which still can be worked out as cost per day. But let's keep it simple.We already touch on this subject... so if i react to a silly question such as ''OK, but it will be £10 per day to use said server?'' with a witty put-down, i think that's fair
We know 10 pound a day is silly and will never be trialled to the player, you know that as well. this was nothing more but to get me into an argument and look for holes. And you seem in on it. This is called baiting.
So, why would you ask me what my limit per day is... first, most people talk monthly. i also addressed this is passing but some people here seem not to be taking part in the thread, but just looking to fight. Sad... still here we go
was can assume from that post that 5 or 3 a month is a fair price... but can it be done for that, who knows. I have answered your question, in more clear terms. but the question '' but it will be £10 per day'' is a bait, as i stated ''.. and even though someone already trying to poo-poo the idea on cost tenner a month''. hope that helps
Some people have had me quote my posts several times now, to show i have already addressed a point. What is the reason? This cant be fair discussion... can it? asking again and again?
Here you are making the accusation that the poster is refusing to even offer the choice; of your 'imaginary' idea.
Your idea is well thought out, well written, well stated and then; supported by some very good arguments. However: By the general replies here; it is disliked and unwanted. I believe, the point of your thread; was to get a consensus of players to agree with you and back your idea for F.D. to trial said idea. So far you have not made your case.
You ended our communication by stating ''Sorry any valid arguments you had, have just gone out the window''.
Cant have it both ways, and try to play me. Why are you still engaging when you made that statement (rhetorical).
I would be silly to continue responding to you when you have made your position clear... Any other engagement is just to troll, as you have no value in my arguments.
In case you missed it, read my first post in this thread.
The example that you gave isn't a subscription-based game at all, let alone one that has any kind of live history. Each of us can like or dislike WoW/ToR/Everquest/FFIV/DAoC, etc, but those games have all delivered both objective quality, and stability, even under heavy loads. The vast majority of the time, the content in those games works, works well, and the servers are stable. When the game in question is one that is in continuous development, those things come with that network model combined with a continuous income stream for the developer.
The main reason that I would support a move to a subscription model is because I believe that there are things that we could have/get under that model that we can't or won't under the current one. Big-deal things that would change this game for the better, and perhaps breathe a lot of life into it.
So yes, much more to that assertion - I am not one of the intellectual peasants on this forum, Jack.
Riôt
Last edited:
I disagree.
not a subscription model, no... kinda.. i can see why what i wrote is confusing and i'm not the best at explaining it sometimes.
Its the idea of an instance run on a server.. so it more stable. The subscription is how to pay for it, and who get to use it (the people that payed for it do ). Not a replacement for P2P (peer 2 peer) network or the once purchased - free play we have now, or the cosmetic purchase support system we have... just an option, that's not intended to impact anyone that is not interested.
lets brake this down :
'-so i would basically be paying a sub for the privilege of getting ganked'
Yes, that's exactly what i'm saying. Note: That this is to offer the people that already use open, to interact with players, the option to have a smother experience. I know that's what it looks like i wrote, but your right... I really meant, i want people to pay for a open only service, in-witch they must partake in and get ganked (Now before you saying i'm being rude, white knights - common be fair
See, look, i said you would be ''...these servers i am subbing for'..'
i know where i wrote ''I’m not saying force a subscription service'' it really says '' basically be paying a sub for the privilege of getting ganked''. how could i be so blind!
-''majority did not want a subscription based game''
Yes, i know, if only i had explained its not a subscription service to play the game. If i had explained, maybe 3 times now, how its more of a connection upgrade...if only >< but thank for bringing it up again.
-''I subscription where you connect to these better servers would also split the playerbase, are you intending these servers to implement a different BGS shared only with these servers?''
That ones interesting because it's almost as if you half understood what i was talking about, so a reasonable question... No, would be the same BGS, don't see why it would not. maybe you can tell me how my idea would impact the BGS (Not saying it wont, i just cant see how, and i'm asking you)
-"In terms of the coding, I'm a programmer " cool, so i'm i been doing it since i was 7, few years of 40 now
''All in all i think it's way too late in the day to implement such a system'' : it its already here in the form of P2p, Just modified version.. that emulated player i was taking about...
and this
''Already there is a lot of discussions on the different game modes affecting the BGS, adding another "mode" which is basically what this is, only a subscribed one, would cause outrage''
Outrage
I did read your little spoilers, which basically boiled down to "If you have anything to say that is mentioned in the spoilers, don't bother replying, I'm only looking for people who agree with me, thats not how forums work.
you asked what people think i gave you my point of view, and i think it would be a terrible idea.
no, i did the spoilers to stream line what i wish to know, and what i have considered. Outlining my topic. I have done this as i have been asked to simplify my post, in some threads, and i listen to feed back, and try to learn.
Strangely, this topic has been very hostile, and i don't think it because of the idea, but the misunderstanding of what i'm putting forward. " people can be correct but disagree, if they are misunderstanding each other view point... something i'm seeing a lot on this forum, but rather than fight it out (them post that get shut down), i try and restate my position... but when i've done it so clearly to start with.. i wonder what sort of person i'm dealing with, who would post without taking in my post.
(also know there is a personal level of distaste for me, i come off as smug and patronising, but hay, be adult about things, and we get along just fine... I just want people to read before they post, not much to ask)
Some people are taking it to personally when i reply to there statements, Sure, i will be a bit snarky when the post i'm replying to was also such, or outright calming i'm saying things i have not.. then they go on to argue that made up point, which then someone else agrees with... and you have a flow of discussion that had nothing to do with what i said ><.. (makes it look like people are in agreement in disliking my idea, but they arnt even talking about what i stated..interesting to watch)
See, what happens is, i put something forward, then someone may counter it, find fault, or disagree (maybe even agree). its not about having people agree with my ideas. i put them here to be challenge (also posted that
).If the challenge points out a flaw that's fine, i'm not hurt, i have learn something. But if people are arguing a different subject to the one i put forward, they they are arguing a case for something they have made up in their own mind... case being
''You mentioned it these servers i am subbing for would be open only, so i would basically be paying a sub for the privilege of getting ganked but on a much better connection, no thanks.''
Only fair for me to defend myself against such statement. they arnt even relevant to what i have put forward. yet people take it to heart and get upset, and i guess feel silly for posting it, and then get upset with me
I cant help it when i'm right. Hope this helps
I play with people in the UK, Europe and the US from Japan, and very rarely have any problems. So I'm going to vote no.
ADDED (When i refer to P2P that peer 2 peer )
Important notes before you continue
-I know Fdev chose Cosmetics over Subscription
-I understand this causes an issue with Life time passes
-I know not everyone has cash
-I know it’s less scalable than P2P
-know this has been discussed over and over.
-Don’t just post ‘No’ in this thread, it’s not smart, it’s not cleaver, its spam.
P2P, it’s a shambles most of the time, wings fall apart, Streamers can get in the same instance without a lot of work. Gankers find it hard to get customers, if they are playing outside their geographical zone.
(once I was winged up with people in the US, and in I’m the UK, best I got to see was a marker of where their ship was, in normal space, saw it flying around, but no ship, not same instance)
It impacts all game play and makes Elite feel like it’s held together with sticky tape, in regards to multi play.
I know how clever the P2P system is, the deves have show us… Nice work chaps and chappets, it really is an inspired bit of coding (not being sarcastic) but its hardly doing the job in a lot of cases. It works for casually bumping into people… works great as a solo player in Open, who likes the random encounters (that’s me) But not so great for groups of friends from around the world, or any sort of large scale event.
Not goanna have a 25 v 25 player battle, even if you could get that many in one instance, it’s not gonna hole together… yet the trailers for elite make it look so much fun (misleading eh?)
Wait, before you post
- I’m not saying force a subscription service
- I’m not saying remove the P2P system
- I am hinting at a server based mode (open) for subscriber. Allowing for more stable , predictable instancing, as an option.
What I would hope could happen (even though it would be a big risk, just to test, and a waste of resources if it fails) is a subscription mode that runs on a real server (not a reel-to-reel server). See if people will play for it.
Sure, we may have the problem of complaints over it being open and such, and griefer , but we have all that already
For example; I was at the CG, must have been 8 commanders in my instance, maybe another 5 in a US bases instance, and who knows in other instances. That could have been an epic experience… but nah, we are all over the place, connection droppings out and … hmph.. it’s sub-par for an online experience.
And just a bit more before you post
-I understand that it could cause issues with others platforms and how that would work… I dint care
-I understand it would be a huge investment of time and resources for Fdev, but would it be worth it? Would it make Elite shine?
-And the risks of a trail are – If it not used, then fDev have lost time and resources, that’s cash! and now they have dead code they gotta rip out. I know it not just an easy thing to do.
-also, I understand this would put none-open modes at a disadvantage with connectivity but hay
ADDED:
To clear up where we should should be up to now. As i have addressed a few things, but no one seems to check all the posts.
---
It more like a service, offering a more stable multi player experience, for them willing to pay for it. Not a forced payment to play the game... Not an advantage for paying a subscription. More like upgrading your connection to the game.
The game would be as it is, if (big if / unlikely if ) such a thing was introduced. and if it worked or failed, anyone that didn't want to partake in the server hosted instance mode... well they would be none the wiser... apart from maybe you would end up with a split between the standard P2P and Server hosted connection types... if people took up the option, in a trial. <something one poster brought up, as a fair point to talk about, but the topic when in reverse
I doubt making Open Servers being subscription based will make things any better. It would just make poorer people even more off imo. It would be nice to be able to Instance with players easier though. I can instance with most of the people I play with but only when they use a Ethernet cable. Whenever there on Wifi i can never manage getting in the same instance.
Last edited: