Agreed. Donation-driven communities were how servers were operated for years (and how many still do). To suggest that there has been some kind of fundamental shift in the game's demographic that would prevent that model from working now is simply not true.
In fact, those very same people who were willing to support a server community in the first years of TF2 existence now have even more disposable income should they wish to do so. The difference between the two funding models is that as opposed to those MOTD ads, a server community that is supported through donations has to provide enough actual value to players that they CHOOSE to support that community/server. MOTD ads simply monetize anyone that connects, without providing any additional value (and in so many cases, because the system is so open to abuse, the servers are/were barely suitable for running TF2 at all in terms of performance). There seems to be a misconception here, though. I'm certainly not saying that all servers/communities that run those ads are "bad". Far from it. Nor am I saying that those who use them are somehow doing so in a malicious or underhanded manner. However, I AM saying that when something that has been allowed to be used on community servers sullies the general reputation of those very servers so much that we actually have players that resist the slightest change that would give community servers a little more exposure, then perhaps it is time to start the conversation about whether it is in the best interest of community servers operators as a whole to continue to allow those ads to function. Frankly, if we have choose between restoring and rebuilding player confidence in the quality of community servers, or allowing those ads to run until there are no players left willing to set foot on a community server, the answer would seem to be an easy one. On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Cats From Above <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, decent community servers who provide value to their respective > communities generally do not have funding issues. It is possible to be a > donation driven community without handing out stupid perks. Just as it is > equally possible to innovate new features and game modes for your servers > that players actually feel like financially supporting. If you think that > MOTD advertisements are the only way to run a cost-neutral server, then I > can't help but thing that you must be running some pretty poor servers that > the community would be better without. > > PS: For the amusement of all mailing list members, I'll simply point out > that Paul <[email protected]> is an active MOTDgd.com affiliate. This > adds context to his claim that "advertising is no longer an issue". > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 11:25 PM, Michael Loveless <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> So what you're essentially saying is that it's perfectly fine for Valve >> to suck every penny out of players for cosmetics & pay to win items, to >> allow the community servers to build up the game for years then steal all >> their clients by virtually stuffing Official Servers down their throat >> while monetize them via the aforementioned items (and Pinion-type ads for >> years) but it's not okay for a regular Joe with a full time job to put >> safe, non-threatening video advertisements on the MOTD of their servers so >> it's not just another expense like everything else in life is? We are >> supposed to expect pre-teens, teenagers, and even young adults who either >> have no income or likely minimal income to donate on a monthly basis, >> especially when Valve has so many shiny objects dangling in front of their >> faces? Basically what you're argument is, is that no one should be running >> servers except for those with disposable income who can afford to do it >> solely as an expense? >> >> Laughter ensues. >> >> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Cats From Above <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Seeing Paul attempt to portray advertising as a non-issue is completely >>> ineffable - that being far beyond the descriptive capability of words or >>> laughter. The continuing existence of MOTD advertising encourages all the >>> wrong behaviours within the community servers that use it. Furthermore, as >>> E. Olsen noted, it contributes to an overall image problem with community >>> servers and in itself gives players additional reason to use Quickplay >>> instead of the server browser. (Quickplay being completely immune to MOTD >>> adverts after all). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Paul <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I hate to correct some people here, but advertising is no longer an >>>> issue so I don't see why it has been brought up when it's no longer a >>>> problem. HTML MOTD is not possible when the client joins via matchmaking or >>>> quickplay, Valve changed that a long time ago. Sure, there are a few rogue >>>> servers which physically force you to re-enable HTML MOTD cvar if you >>>> disabled it, but even then if you join via matchmaking or quickplay you >>>> still can't see it, so it's moot. Thanks :). >>>> >>>> On 5 July 2015 at 05:28, Alexander Corn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The entire point of Quickplay from the get-go was to help people to >>>>> easily find servers offering vanilla-ish gameplay. That is, major game >>>>> settings are set to their defaults, no custom gamemodes, no game-breaking >>>>> donor perks, etc. >>>>> >>>>> It's a decent idea, the only problem is that Valve added it and then >>>>> *ignored >>>>> it*. Then people started realizing that they can register for >>>>> Quickplay and pretend to be vanilla and nothing bad would happen to them >>>>> for months, if ever. >>>>> >>>>> To this date, I'm not quite sure that anyone at Valve even looks at >>>>> reports submitted with the in-game report tool (or the bug reporter >>>>> either, >>>>> for that matter). >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Cats From Above < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Your version of events borders on white-knighting, in my honest >>>>>> opinion. Valve has a share of blame for allowing an environment where >>>>>> unscrupulous operators were rewarded financially simply by getting people >>>>>> to join thier servers. The rise of Pinion and the like was attractive to >>>>>> individuals who wanted to cash-in on advertising. And what better way to >>>>>> boost your profits then by tricking players into joining your servers >>>>>> thinking that they were fuller than what they were or that they had real >>>>>> people on them. MOTD Advertising is what made that deception attractive - >>>>>> it was the reward behind it all. Yes, the players would disconnect the >>>>>> second they realised that the server was empty or that they were playing >>>>>> against bots, but the operator still got to cash in on an impression. >>>>>> >>>>>> So did Quickplay solve the problem? No. Why? Because it didn't remove >>>>>> the sugar from the table. Rather it just meant that instead of deceiving >>>>>> the player (Who would have likely remembered the name of a bad community) >>>>>> the unscrupulous operators were now deceiving Quickplay instead - How >>>>>> grand >>>>>> it must have been for operators intending to run cash-cow servers to have >>>>>> Quickplay steering unsuspecting traffic to them. In my view that made the >>>>>> situation worse and in a manner that was reasonably foreseeable. Yet >>>>>> somehow it escaped Valve. What they should have done was killed the >>>>>> notion >>>>>> of MOTD advertising from the onset so that a business model built on >>>>>> deception wasn't financially lucrative. Instead they had a knee-jerk >>>>>> reaction and banished all community servers (good and bad) from the >>>>>> primary >>>>>> Quickplay pool. Some people would say this response is a colossal >>>>>> non-sequitur and they'd be right. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wrote a 1400 word response on this topic but I decided that I could >>>>>> make my point with the summary above and that such would probably be more >>>>>> appreciated than a giant wall of text. Let me know if I'm mistaken. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Phillip Vector < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >What you just said implies that *every *community server provides >>>>>>> a modified game-play experience, which is not only a dubious claim but >>>>>>> one >>>>>>> that almost certainly stems from a distinct level of benightedness. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A modified game-play experience, yes. Even if it's just placing a >>>>>>> text ad every 5 mins., it is a difference experience than stock. I did >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> mean to imply that all community servers modify game play. But I would >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> interested in seeing one community server that operates like the default >>>>>>> Valve servers do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >There are community servers out there, many of them, which offer a >>>>>>> vanilla experience in aspects of game-play. My question to you is why >>>>>>> should those servers be treated as second-class citizens to Valve >>>>>>> servers >>>>>>> by "default". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They shouldn't. However, I don't know how long you have been part of >>>>>>> this, but I recall when community servers weren't treated differently. >>>>>>> Some >>>>>>> were terrible and cheated the system to trick players joining their >>>>>>> servers. When Valve tried to stop them, they cheated the system more. >>>>>>> Even >>>>>>> after Valve constantly tried to help those community servers who played >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> the rules, the community kept calling foul. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So eventually, Valve (rightly so IMHO) said "Fuck it" and made all >>>>>>> community servers suspect. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Valve is on the right track giving community servers who play by the >>>>>>> rules equal standing for valve servers. But I'm pretty sure that some >>>>>>> community is going to start gaming the system and Valve will have to >>>>>>> say, >>>>>>> "Fuck it" again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list >>>>>> archives, please visit: >>>>>> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >>>>> please visit: >>>>> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >>>> please visit: >>>> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >>> please visit: >>> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >> please visit: >> https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds > >
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds
