So how do you combat against it then?
QP isn't as much of a problem as Valve servers are, Valve servers
don't show you what all you can do with the game, provide poor
moderation, are easily susceptible to hackers. The biggest issue
is with players, players who are new to the game do not learn on
Valve servers for the most part, being the way they are. Comp TF2
is having problems getting new people in because there are simply
not enough people around interested anymore. Your first
impression of a game is what makes or breaks it.
Fletcher Dunn of Valve even said this system would be bad for new
players, and they went with it anyway. QP on the other hand is
just unfair, the convenience sacrifices a lot of what the game
has to offer, and puts more powers in the hands of mega
communities who know how to cheat the system.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Matthias "InstantMuffin" Kollek
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Because MOTDs are actually useful for things other than ads.
And I'm wondering what happens if you join a server which
forces you to have motds activated.
Furthermore quickplay is not the issue. The issue (the reason
behind everything) is traffic. Why even bother and open up
the server browser, trying to find an ad-free server when the
result is a game of minesweeper you will always lose? The
average player Joe then uses quickplay.
Also quickplay does not allow actual gamemods which are the
potential that makes community servers great (besides the
ability to have proper moderation).
You want to limit the amount of snipers? You're not allowed
to enter quickplay anymore.
Have a non-default map? May it be something new and exciting,
or an official map with some needed fixes? No quickplay for you.
On 19.12.2015 02:08, Cats From Above wrote:
And what has this got to do with getting servers back onto
the default Quickplay pool, Matthias? It is my belief that
Valve will always keep HTML MOTDs disabled for Quickplay
joins...and that we need to fight the battles we can win.
Hence, getting servers back onto the default Quickplay pool
needs to come before your personal vendetta against
advertising, sorry, but that's what it looks like. If, in
the course of achieving the goal of Quickplay reform,
adverts need to be discussed, then I'm sure we can discuss
it. But given the current configuration of Quickplay and the
intended goal, it does not.
I also note that more server ops would be inclined to engage
in this conversation if they felt it wasn't going to damage
thier community whilst doing so - We need thier combined input.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Matthias "InstantMuffin"
Kollek <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think if a player wants to play on a community server
without ads, he should be able to get a list of servers
meeting the criteria. MOTDs actually have a lot of other
uses.
At the moment if I join a random community server from
within the browser, I have to assume the worst. How can
we fix this? Transparency and moderation.
On 19.12.2015 01:53, Cats From Above wrote:
Well, quite frankly, we could avoid a whole lot of bias
issues if the topic of adverts and internal server
policy was ruled entirely out of scope. This shouldn't
be about telling sever ops how they should run and fund
thier servers. Adverts and Quickplay are two different
issues in my view – especially as HTML motds are
disabled on Quickplay connects and will likely remain
so regardless of whatever outcomes are achieved.
On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Rowedahelicon
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I'm open to either idea, but I think the bottom
line should that we strive for an outcome both
preferable to us and the TF2 player base as well,
so as long as we're doing that then we're doing good?
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Matthias
"InstantMuffin" Kollek <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I don't see any reason why someone needs to be
a non-server op to represent the interests of
server ops. The idea is to pick decent
representatives that are server ops, and are
willing to represent a consensus, with the
added experience and expertise they have to
properly recognize and understand point of
views. The politics analogy isn't misplaced.
You don't have a member of another party
representing the other. Why? Conflict of
interest. (How absurd I know)
Maybe pick one non op and 5 server ops. It's
still ridiculous.
_______________________________________________
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
--
*Matthew (Rowedahelicon) Robinson*
Web Designer / Artist / Writer
Website - http://www.rowedahelicon.com/
_______________________________________________
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives,
please visit:
https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds
