I would imagine that is the process, still. But I imagine there must be some incentive for third party vendors to provide "official" servers, and as more and more of those come online, less traffic for the rest of the pot (community servers) for matchmaking traffic where a 'vanilla' server will be preferred.
On one hand, this is a good thing, as for the entire life of L4D2, I have never seen a single UK official server. France and/or Washington were the only destinations ever served up in 2500 hours of my experience. Having UK official servers, albeit third-party ones, is a good thing for finding a low-latency, populated, busy and vanilla game. On the other hand, I worry about the quality of these servers as well as what strategy Valve has in mind by bringing them on board. Again, what is the incentive for giving Valve free servers at cost to your company? What about EA and Battlefield, where for example, Multiplay UK hold all the keys to ranked servers (as I last recall) in the UK reducing competitive pricing. Or whereby everyone wants to cram onto a ranked server to play leaving all the other servers vacant. It'd be nice to know what Valve's thoughts are on this, but as always, I expect they will probably keep their cards close to their chest. Regards, Nick From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erik-jan Riemers Sent: 11 July 2012 15:55 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Csgo_servers] FreeGameServers.GG - 'Official' Valve servers If that means our "community servers" are getting left behind it would certainly be a stab in the back. Whats the point in trying to get a full server if they will be directed somewhere else first. I do assume some sort of model like tf2 is in place, which (as far as i can tell) uses the "first on officials then after xxx time use community too based on rating"
_______________________________________________ Csgo_servers mailing list [email protected] https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/csgo_servers
