> You know this because every post on spuf has the hours people play next to > it?
You didn't know people put their profiles on SPUF? Shows how much you know. > Do you think the country would be better if someone decided that meant they > should accommodate every whinge and that would make a better country? If > not, why do you think that approach would make a better game or a better > server? This is the reason why CS and CSS both have more players than TF2 if you don't include the idlers which you can estimate by peak players. And Valve did accommodate people who wanted to play on modded servers before. Just because you are happy playing default TF2 doesn't mean everyone else is. I prefer more variety of maps and gameplay instead of deathmatch with a single control point (koth), control points, moving control point (payload), capture the flag, reskinned weapons, and waiting 20 seconds to respawn. I have seen a lot of regulars on my friends list stop TF2 and playing COD, Tribes, Dota 2, and SMNC instead because Valve depopulated modded servers. > But I don't see any reason at all for anyone to run lots of servers and > then, once in debt, to worry about how they are going to pay for them. Not sure why you think I am saying there needs to be a business model for the server hosters. I'm saying why Valve won't do anything about it. It isn't immoral for server to at least break even. And you get discounts for running more servers. You have been trolling this mailing list hard. On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:20 AM, dan <needa...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > On 26/04/2012 22:00, Robert Paulson wrote: >> >> I warned about this trend back in December and no one listened. Now >> that the Christmas and Policy of Truth honeymoon is over, you are all >> coming out of the woodwork. > > > What trend? That people are happily playing TF2? > > As I said, the complaint seems to be "my server is empty ergo people must be > too dumb to know my server is better or how to join it, or valve must be > stealing all the people onto their dumbed down servers or quickplay must be > broken" > > The truth seems far removed from that, even if a bug does exist in > quickplay. > > And this "coming out the woodwork" is about 3 or 4 people making lots of > posts. Some of which don't necessarily agree with the conspiratorial theory. > > >> Though I guess it only makes sense to >> complain out of desperation now that Lotus and others are dropping >> heavily in popularity. > > > I'm not surprised they dropped. Their servers don't even seem to have any of > the redeeming features that some of you think matter. > > As I said before, people deciding to make a quick buck from running servers > put themselves into a position where they decided they had to cheat to try > and get players and / or via some silly plugins try and scam a few people > into parting with cash. If they couldn't get players except via cheating the > system, it stands to reason their servers will be less popular when the > cheating stops. > > When you add livenudes to your tag, even if it's in jest, you're answering > your own question about popularity. > > But who are they? Why should their servers be full? Is the modern trend of > entitlement raising its head? > > "I'm running servers ergo valve should send me people" > > As I said in another post, I think having a full server is a happy bonus, > it's not something I expect to have. Since a shaved monkey could run a > server, anyone could rent and run 500 TF2 servers tomorrow - call themselves > something "UberGameProTF2clanEU.de" would follow canonical guidelines. Knock > up a webpage and forum so they can be derisory to their players, and then > they should expect Valve to direct traffic to their servers so the money > starts rolling in? Right? Err...why? > > Those 500 servers weren't there the day before and, if they go, there are > plenty of shaved chimps waiting in the wings for this > 'insta-business-just-run-servers' > > One problem perhaps they will find though is, there's no 'things are ok now > we're playing by the rules' button. So if their servers were blacklisted by > someone prior to them removing the junk plugins, then they probably still > will be. > > Why would anyone remove them? There are plenty of full servers to play on. I > used to play on lotusclan's UK 2fort server over night and any time when it > didn't have 32 players on it. I used their server mostly because they had > respawn timers enabled and you could actually play the game. For a while it > was great. They ruined their own servers by adding bots and by not realising > the 32 slot thing was a dumb idea and instead deciding the way to get > players was to copy what saigns et al were doing. > > They even have a plugin that continually pastes "if you have clue about how > to run this server, please tell us" on their servers. > > >> The fact is, Valve will not do anything about it. >> >> 1. People that barely played the game complained endlessly on the SPUF >> forums about faster respawn and 33 slot servers. And now that >> quickplay has screwed those servers over, no one seems to be >> complaining there, even though plenty of people complain to us about >> having to wait 20 seconds to respawn. > > > You know this because every post on spuf has the hours people play next to > it? > > People complain about the weather, paying tax, the price of fish and repeats > on TV. > Do you think the country would be better if someone decided that meant they > should accommodate every whinge and that would make a better country? If > not, why do you think that approach would make a better game or a better > server? > > >> 4. The F2P business model is fundamentally at odds with 3rd party >> servers. Money that is donated to a server is lost to the Mann Co >> store. Valve has to pay for servers too, but they get a huge bulk >> discount. > > > I can see some people who try to make money by selling servers, to clans and > so on, and they run servers too. There might be a business model there. They > buy a server and then add value by turning something that's easy to do, into > something that's easy enough for tweedledum and tweedledee posting here to > do. > > But I don't see any reason at all for anyone to run lots of servers and > then, once in debt, to worry about how they are going to pay for them. Nor > for them expecting there to be a business model supporting that. To the > point where they decide they can create a business model by giving people > different coloured text chat or 100% crits or hats and so on...or worse to > try and scam and cheat players onto their servers. > > If it works or worked in the past, good luck to them, but if it stops > working, they can't moan at Valve that a dumb business model no longer works > - especially not the one that relied on scamming players. > > -- > Dan. > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: https://list.valvesoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
