1. Hey Guest! If you're more than just a WildStar fan and want to keep up on the latest MMO news, reviews and opinion pieces then I'd like to suggest you visit our sister site MMO Central

Your take on: Legacy servers? +Poll

Discussion in 'WildStar General' started by Infamouz, Oct 26, 2013.

?

How do you feel about Legacy servers, should Carbine implement them in the future?

  1. Yes

    13.6%
  2. No

    59.1%
  3. I am indifferent about the matter

    27.3%
  1. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    I want to hear peoples opinions on the matter, have some interaction and just talk about the matter. Does there have to be some major scheme around it, some grand old goal?

    Please do give me few examples of your claim "They tend to fail".
  2. Ianpact

    Ianpact Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, LA, USA
    Pretty sure servers/realms/worlds in most games hold a few 1000 players (thought I recall JG saying they were aiming for 3-7 thousand, I may have confused it with TESO). I'm not sure a mere 200-400 warrants enough desire to put in the effort, from a company, to keep it up. That seems like a pretty extreme niche to me but hey, if they can do it without spending big resources on it, why not "please" everybody. That said, it may lead to separating the community more.
  3. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    I just checked and there is 10868 players online on the two biggest World of Warcraft private legacy servers. Now this number doesn't really tell anything about how profitable legacy servers would be, and what would be the demand for them, if the players needed to subscribe in order to play. Also world of warcraft has seen some 40.000.000 players pass trough, which gives the game quite of a big playerbase who might be interested in a legacy server.

    Just wanted to grab that number out, as you too seemed to use rather random number of 200-400 players.
  4. HappinessFactory

    HappinessFactory Cupcake

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Even as a PvP player I would not play on legacy servers. Updates may throw a huge wrench into balance issues but I know I look forward to each patch itchy to try out the new changes. Even though I complain that something might be overpowered I still appreciate a little change here and there to mix things up a little.

    @Infamouz
    So it seems like you're taking this from a PvP point of view. Has there been a point in WoW's history where you would have stopped all updates because you thought PvP was perfect in all aspects (or close to it)? And do you think any PvE players would be content clearing the same bosses over and over again?

    and last question... Do you believe people would pay a subscription fee for legacy servers?
  5. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    I am not thinking about the things from purely PvP point of view. I would love to play TBC and WotLK raids again, how long those would hold my interests I truly do not know. WoW PvP balance has never been perfect, there has always been something that has been over the top, and some poor classes or specs unplayable. If I had to pick I would most likely take Season 6 or 7. Those seasons had some imbalanced things too, so I am not saying they were anywhere perfect, but they were the most fun and I'd argue the most balanced seasons so far.

    I'm not sure would PvE players be interested in clearing the same bosses again, but I would love to clear the bosses I never got the chance to clear, such as clearing Sunwell in TBC. Also I don't think people who have already cleared the content would be the only players interested in legacy servers. There might be alot of players who join the game on the later expansions, who might want to play the older expansions as that content is "fresh" to them.

    You can't really ask would people pay subscription for the legacy servers, I think you should ask would people pay it for the game as whole and look at legacy servers as a additional fun you can have as you wish. If that kind of a option would be available in WoW, I would most likely jump between live and legacy servers when I play (This if I still played wow). There might be few players who would unsubscribe as they don't find the current content interesting but might want to play on the older content they loved. How many people would that be? No clue.

    Yet again, this is just WoW point of view of the matter. WoW is the titan of MMO games and can hardly be compared to new IP such as WildStar.
  6. Livnthedream

    Livnthedream Super Cupcake

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Likes Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't see the point in getting said opinions and there really is nothing to talk about. At best you are going to get a circular discussion of people who feel the company should comply to their whim of being able to indulge their nostalgia whenever they want and those who think its a waste of time for various reasons. Even if one side is heavier, neither is "right".

    Essentially every "off brand" server that has been introduced across various games has failed. Specifically for nostalgia servers the Eq one died a quick death. But if you look at all server types, especially the hardcore ones that are so often requested, they go the way of the dodo quickly, in many cases dying out within 6 months.

    I can touch on the emotional aspects that limit it being viable on a grand scale and on the sheer logistics which both points to it being better left in the private server realm rather than the company doing it, but that is a pretty foregone conclusion if you have looked into it really at all. Its too expensive for too little gain.
  7. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    Molten has been up since 2009 and is still doing rather well. Last year they seemed to reach the following numbers; "We reached a concurrent 29,254 players online on October 20, 2013, marking the highest for year 2013."

    I do not have data at the moment for the year 2014, but currently there are 10795 user online.

    Now I have no clue what number of players would be the break even point for hosting such service, and what would be the break point for RoI in comparison to live servers, so the opportunity cost would be equal or higher. If you have this kind of a numbers, please do come forward with them.

    I am happy that you have came in to this kind of a conclusion, if you find it in you to be so dear you could tell us how you reached this conclusion and what kind of a material you used in reaching it?

    Also you can not always look at opportunity cost, as companies do not always have interesting and profitable enough projects to allocate their assets in to. Of course company can in this situation decide to give out more dividends to the share holders, buy back company shares, pay off loans or just burn it on a pyre if they wish.
  8. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    I would also like to point out that we do not need to find who is right, or who is wrong. We have discussion on these forums ranging from bunny ears to chua stew, and that's completelly fine. That´s the cool thing about opinions, you can discuss about them. Facts are rather hard to discuss about, as they are facts and there really ain't too much room for a discussion. Then again very few things in the world actually are facts.
  9. Ianpact

    Ianpact Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, LA, USA
    Oh, BS, you went back and edited your post. It originally only said 200 and atom said

    So don't give me that garbage. You got a source to cite, fine. Don't get pissy with me just because you didn't like what I had to say. You wanted opinion, so you got it. Hell, I'm even happy for it to happen as long as it doesn't take away from the main game, just as I stated before. Also, citing that WoW has had load of players is next to pointless as everyone in the game industry and even blizzard themselves have said the popularity was a fluke.


    Not sure it's been mentioned in this thread but we will have Mentoring in the game, so we may be able to scale ourselves back to early raids for the challenge later in the games life.
  10. Jabberwocky

    Jabberwocky Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Likes Received:
    376
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Defunct laboratory on Bezgelor
    I voted no because it is a waste of resources and the main reason people play on those private servers is because they are too poor or cheap to pay the $15/month subscription cost. Also, another key reason for people playing on those servers is because they can go to a vendor and get ANY piece of gear or mount they want for for free. There is also custom gear made by the hosts of the servers that is extremely OP so you can pwn noobs. There is more to the populations of private servers than OMG I can play on a Vanilla WoW only server or whatever expansion you enjoyed the most.
  11. Infamouz

    Infamouz Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sweden
    Ummmm, what?

    I have not edited any numbers of mine, I have only edited typos and such. I have not said 200 in any point, I think you must have mistaken.

    I had no particular feelings about your post to be all fair, I just found it strange that you used number such as 200-400 as to; Where did you came up with the number?

    And I am happy to hear your opinion, I really am, like I am happy to hear everyone else's. I truly can not understand why did you get angry towards me, what did I say that could entitle a hostile answer? If you got bothered that I used word such as "random" in my sentence, I must apologize. I am not quite sure what to replace the word with as english is not my native, and therefore my vocabulary is limited, and I don't quite know all the synonyms out there.

    If you read my first post, you would had seen that I actually mentioned Mentoring system in the 2nd paragraph.

    Edit: I think word "Arbitrary" might had been better suited than "random"?
  12. AcidBaron

    AcidBaron "That" Cupcake

    Joined:
    May 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    623
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Belgium
    Nope, because while you are looking at the content you are also missing all the QoL changes and balance changes a game went through. Bringing back old annoyances is never a good idea.

    And making people play with all the new features and system will bypass the difficulties setup.

    In either case you don't win and get the expected results people want.
  13. Livnthedream

    Livnthedream Super Cupcake

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Likes Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The only people that have those kinds of number's directly do not release them to the public. Its pretty simple to look at all of the advantages you would receive from an actual studio putting forth the server though vs the free ones to see where the costs come into place. The biggest one is the service itself. Private servers have no responsibility to handle things like botters and spammers, much less players who are stuck, or have a question, or deleted their sword of awesomesauce. Most of them tend to fob that off onto volunteers, which a big name cannot rightly do. Gm's alone are rather expensive, and they are going to need to be trained to work only on that iteration of the game. Ie you need to hire a chunk more gms just for that. The hardware is pretty moot, though not as moot as you seem to think as not only gameplay, but item servers and the like all have to be set aside separate, plus you need to take different locations into account in terms of lag. That is all basic expectations of a monetized service.

    Now you need to look at keeping players themselves. Since this is a completely different iteration of the game, that you are no longer updating or adding new content to, how many players are really going to reasonably stick around in that sort of state? That alone is a tiny percentage, especially if they are paying for it. On top of which, now you have your standard log in and play server, how many are really going to sit there and play on something that they know is not going to go anywhere when they can be playing their main, or an alt. Running one more daily, or prepping for the raid? How many of their friends are going to play with them? I mean even the Goons have a hard time keeping a decent amount of players on their chosen vanilla server. There is a reason why they have trouble getting anyone to really test anything on the PTR, this is a similar situation. All of these are skipped by private servers.

    Except that whole part where those who feel they deserve the right to indulge wont accept facts. It does not work. If it did, it would be a common thing. You cannot reasonably give people old content and charge them normal price for it and it be successful. Especially when that company is making the revenue that these kinds of companies are generally looking for. This starting at 3:00 for example:
    http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/4qe93h/pach-attack--when-will-pc-kill-next-gen-
  14. CaRaDaGaiTa

    CaRaDaGaiTa Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I just hope the game follow a line and don't change so dramatically to a point where do you want to play an old patch... like wow did.
    Laban likes this.
  15. Livnthedream

    Livnthedream Super Cupcake

    Joined:
    May 20, 2013
    Likes Received:
    1,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you want to continue to gain players throughout its lifespan it must.
  16. FairyTailisBack

    FairyTailisBack Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Everything they did up to Wrath seemed pretty reasonable to me.
  17. CaRaDaGaiTa

    CaRaDaGaiTa Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    43
    WOTLK season 6-7 PVP + TBC PvE = Almost perfect game.
  18. Kalmander

    Kalmander Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Likes Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Costa Rica, Central America
    I'd have to go with "no". I was in WoW from the start, and went through it all, and do miss some of the old stuff... However, as others have said, making legacy servers would require some sort of budgeting, and maintenance, and cost some money in the end. I would prefer that money be spent on more content, or fixing bugs, etc.

    The only way for this to happen, would be to *prove* to NC soft (not Carbine, but NCsoft) that they would actually make money by making some legacy servers. That X number of people would quit if they do not, and that 'X * subscription fee' would cover the cost of the servers... Good luck trying to prove that though...
  19. Pyaray

    Pyaray Carbine Studios

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2013
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    53
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Disclaimer, I can't say we will or will not have legacy servers. I just wanted to throw a few comments into the mix. These should not be taken as the opinions of Carbine, this is just my own personal commentary as a gamer.

    Legacy servers are an interesting nostalgic view of a game you've played for years. They are fairly pointless until the game has been running for many years, and has changed radically. I'm not sure anybody in WoW cared for Legacy servers until Cataclysm when they changed everything in the "old world". Prior to them changing everything, the "old world" was all but abandoned. You could go to Stormwind or Ironforge and there would only be 5-10 people there. That's mostly (IMO) because people want the "new shiny". However, as soon as the "classic" stuff was taken out of the game, now all the sudden people miss it.

    As many of you know, I still play EverQuest (1), and they have a couple of rather successful "Progression" servers, these are effectively what we're talking about here. The Progression servers all started out only having the zones from original EQ, the first expansion got "unlocked" when both of the classic dragons got killed. Then the 2nd unlocked when the 3 dragons of that expansion were killed, etc.. I played on one of the progression servers for about 6 months. And then I finally wanted all the expansion features, and went back to my "home" server.

    From a technical stand point, even when playing EQ on the progression server, they were using the newest client, not some outdated client that was used when it was original. Why, because that client probably wouldn't run anymore. It was designed for Windows 95/98, and ran in 640x480 on DirectX 3.0. How many people would actually want to play at 640x480? Which btw, the playable screen area was like 480x320, the rest was UI. That means that even though the expansion that made EQ run at 1600x1200 wasn't part of the original game, everyone still had that feature. They also had features like the mapping system (which was expansion 4 as I recall), and the improved UI, and the new banking system. Because they didn't want to maintain several different versions of the client. They would probably need a full team for each progression server if they were going to do that.

    Another issue with "legacy" servers, is that the full map of the game world is on the client. If you change the map with an expansion, the client has all the new maps. So in order to support legacy servers, you would have to support multiple clients, or at the very least have every version of the map on the clients, which would bloat the clients tremendously. On the EQ Progression servers, the maps that had changed were still the new maps, even before the expansion unlock. And then there are all the UI changes. The spells and abilities are also on the client (although not nearly as large as all the maps, graphics, sounds, etc..) so you would have to maintain all of those in both "classic" and "current" modes.

    How many versions of the "classic" versions do you maintain? One for each patch? One for each expansion? I'm sure there are people who would want vanilla WoW, the way it was on launch day. And then there would be people who would want it to be the version on the day before Burning Crusade. Some would want to open the Gates. Others would want it to be BC with all patches until right before WOTLK. There is no clear snapshot in time of what version would make the most people happy. And you still have to deal with the maintaining compatibility, you can't just say this version is stable and will not change. Because going back to my EQ example, classic EQ will not run on a Windows 7 64bit computer. Will not happen, so you would have to patch the game to make it run, but how much do you patch it so that you don't ruin the "classic feel"?

    So from a maintainability standpoint, this is a very difficult request. It's not without merit. It's just a big question of how much is it worth doing? Obviously Sony felt it was worth doing for EQ1, but as far as I know, none of their other games have it. And even for EQ1, there is a limit to how classic it is. It certainly isn't worth doing until there is some significant patches that change how things are.
    MadBlue, Ianpact, Dysp and 7 others like this.
  20. atom

    atom Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2013
    Likes Received:
    132
    Trophy Points:
    43
    You could have just quoted me.

Share This Page