| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (102)

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 7:11AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why ever are theese games called roleplaying games? They should be called hack'n slash or action-RPG maybe....

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 8:47AM Grendel said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@(Unverified) Just what I thought. So the question is: is there a real MMO_RPG_ anywhere? Maybe LotRO, but I can't stand the game since MoM.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Grendel You must be kidding me now....
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 7:48AM Dblade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, add my voice to the worry about server merges. Launch day is almost always the busiest time in an MMO's life, and the population can only stabilize from there. As attrition happens, with a large number of servers you will start to see ghost towns, which is fatal to a game like Rift where you need people to clear questing hubs of Rift monsters.

There's also the problem of how MMOs over time fill with endgame level people, and according to accounts of leveling, we have capped characters even before the game's retail release. Trion better prepare a robust server transfer mechanism about two or three months down the line as people leave Rift either becoming bored with endgame grinds or because it's not to their tastes.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:18AM Aberhams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dblade You don't really need to worry about having to have people to clear out quest hubs and such, the way the Rift system works it scales with the number of people in the zone. if you are the only person in that zone, then any rifts or invasions will be soloable. I've seen it in action in some of the higher level zones when I was the only person in the area of a rift I opened, I managed to solo the whole thing, untill 10 other people showed up, then much harder mobs spawned with the next stage.

also, people rushing to the level cap are doing it wrong. they are cheating themselves out of everything that makes rift better than a game like wow. hell, I spent all day yesterday just hunting artifacts and exploring. didn't gain a single level, but it was some of the most satsifying MMO gameplay i've ever had.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 7:53AM Purkit said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'd like to comment (rant) on brand loyalty in MMOs a moment, sorry.

RANT ON

I understand that if you like a game you'll want to tell other people about it. That's cool. What isn't cool is trolling every other game that's released because of some perceived threat towards your game of choice. Criticism can be useful but when its motivated by brand loyalty towards another product, it comes across as petty and is often ill informed and inflammatory. Much like the Crapple vs M$ flame war, the whole clannish attitude towards different MMOs pisses me off no end.

Also, internet negativity is kind of a downer.

RANT OFF

Thank you for your time, I love you all and you are all special, some more so then others.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 1:14PM Irem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Purkit
This, so much. And a lot of the "LOOOOL SO HILARIOUS U GUISE THINK GAEM WONT FAIL" trolls are players who watched games they were excited for not do so well, and don't know how to handle it aside from crowing cynically about the inevitable failure of every other game, ever. Nobody will get one over on them again, no sir!
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 8:08AM Yellowdancer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
There really is no solution for the server issue. Your choice is to tick of customers on day one by not being able to get them in the game or take a little pie to the face with server merges. The reason why the game needs additional servers is because they put together a good game that works like its supposed to on day one. This is a GOOD problem to have. More people will definitely pick the game up month two and three of its life cycle. And I don't see a lot of people leaving b/c they ran out of things to do. This is assuming the end game holds up. And it should considering the former WOW and EQ developers they have on staff.

Also the servers have more capacity than they are using now. They have to allow players to move past the starter areas before they can really throw open the gates. This was actually said by the devs for RIFT and other MMO's at their launch.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 8:47AM markt50 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The thing is Trion as in a situation where they can't win as far as the critics are concerned.

As I see it they only have a few realistic choices:

1). Do not add extra servers to cope with the demand. This means horrific queue's for many of their customers, many of whom will rush to blog sites and message boards flaming away about how terrible the game and customer service is.

2). Add a bucket load of servers so that there are servers available for customers to play on with minimal queue times. This of course results in the critics rushing to blog sites and message boards waving their 'The end is nigh' placards and procaiming the game is surely now destined for the same fate as Warhammer.

3). Add only a few servers resulting in massive queue times for the really popular servers and probably even moderate queue times for the remainder. This probably just results in a mixture of complaints from all camps.

Given that we all know that when any new MMO launches there is an initial rush as every curious MMO gamer checks it out. Followed by the inevitable drop as some decide the game isn't for them. Why then are some so suprised at this, we need to get away from the 'fact' that extra servers at launch followed by merges later down the line = fail. This simply isn't true imho, it is simply common sense.

Will there be server merges in Rift's future ? it's almost a certain, does that instantly mean the game is a 'Fail' ? Absolutely not. It is simply about managing server capacity for a given demand. Of course if they end up merging down to like 3 or 4 servers in the distant future then it can be argued it is a failure, but we are a long way from that point.

I personally think Trion are handling the situation very well.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:27AM Aberhams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@markt50

a lot of people like to forget that even WoW had server "merges" in its first couple years to even out population and smooth out queues on high pop servers while getting more people onto low pop servers. they didn't call them merges, they called them "free character migrations" or some such. I think it is likely we will see that sort of thing from Rift, but I'm not too worried about servers outright shutting down.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:47AM Rialle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@markt50

Exactly. Trion is in a rather difficult position when you think about it, because people will complain either way. People will never forgive you for a crappy launch, though, and the number one complaint about RIFT so far is the queues.

I think people do fail to realize when they post that too many launch servers will equal eventual server merges that one game is a glaring exception to this: "World of Warcraft." And while I do not expect RIFT to reach WoW levels of success, I feel it is an overall stronger game than LOTRO, EQ2, WAR, etc. on its own merits.

Yes, we need to get away from the "sever merge == failure" just like we need to get away from the "doesn't have 12,000 subs like WoW == failure" mindset.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:48AM Rialle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ahem, meant 12,000,000 rather than 12,000, obviously.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 11:08AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Rialle It's an easy solution. Have one massive universe.

Okay, I understand that might be very difficult in a game with three times the players of EVE. So, have three servers. A company with big resources like this should be able to accomplish it, since CCP already did. Have one server in the EU with 300k-400k players. Another in the US and another in the APAC region. Three "servers" makes a lot more sense than a hundred.

Seriously, 1,000,000/100=10,000. Figure a fifth are playing at any one time and that's about 2,000. Hell, that's only four times the number of people that can play at one time together on MAG on the PS3 and that's a console FPS. Good grief.
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:04AM Scuffles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Knew this was going to happen but god I wished they had thought ahead to avoid something like this.

I know these things happen and probably anyone who reads massively on even a semi regular basis knows that these things happen.

But in 30 days when they start merging all those servers (and they will) they are going to have the false stigma of failure a bout them. I say false because every launch comes with a tourist season, that initial 30 days where your servers are so overcrowded as to be almost unplayable.

Still as soon as the server mergers start we are going to see grumblings and talk of a failed game.

Please to the next MMO that launches look at channel servers for your initial launch, no you probably won't stick with them after launch. But they avoid all that server merger work and stigma.

Server X
room 1
room 2
...
room 15
server Y
room 1
...
room 10

Not enough? add more channels and yeah your essentially just adding more servers, tho their databases are all tied together.

Then when your all done you just remove the channels and you're left with server X & Y. All the benefits of splurging lots of new servers with non of the cleanup or stigma later on.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 10:17AM markt50 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Scuffles

I think I understand what you are saying, which is basically instances.

I personally don't like games that use them too much, Cryptic went down this route with Champions Online and it just didn't work for me. You could be in Millenium City (instance 1) and your friends would be in different instances and you might not see them.

I would much rather experience a world where there are hundreds or even thousands of people in the same 'space' as me. Rift is actually a perfect example of this, I'll tell you a little bit of my experience from Sunday evening:

So I'm sat doing some trade skills in Meridion (Defiant City) and all of a sudden there is the crack of thunder, myself and loads of other rush outside and the sky is going a strange purple colour, there are 4 or 5 Rifts forming in the distance. A message tells us that the Lord of Iron Fortress is on the March and we need to take him out. Everyone charged out of the city to join the battle, literally hundreds of us took down Rift after Rift until we had pushed into Iron Fortress itself, where we had an epic battle and took down the Lord.

At a rough estimate there must have been well over 300 or 400 people fighting together and it was epic imho. This is the type of thing that just doesn't happen in instanced games, or at least those that rely to heavily on instancing as a type of load balancing. No, I would rather put up with login queue's and possible future server merges if it means I get to repeat the fun of the gameplay experience from last Sunday.


Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:21AM Aganazer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Trion is doing the right thing. End of story.

I swear some people must have such dull lives that they have to dream up things to bitch about.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:28AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What I don't understand is how people think this is really any different than what WoW did several times during its history. They had really busy servers and underpopulated ones, so what did they do? They opened up free character transfers from the high pop to a list of lower pop ones. There are other ways to balance populations than to roll servers together.

Trion needs to have as few people experiencing queues as possible on launch day, so they're going to err on the side of extra server space. I've been thoroughly impressed with how seamlessly the game handles the Rift invasions and have found them genuinely fun. As someone who played WoW since launch but burned out, I'm looking forward to making Rift my new MMO of choice.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:31AM Aberhams said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) I was just thinking about wows "free character migrations", but you can't go bringing up points of logic in a fanfight
Reply

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 9:45AM kjhasdfjkhk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I've never had to wait in queue once and I play during prime time...huh.

Posted: Mar 1st 2011 10:21AM Wensbane said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@kjhasdfjkhk

Neither have I, but then again, I'm on a PvP-RP shard (Firesand)...
Reply

Featured Stories

WoW Archivist: A Glyphmas story

Posted on Dec 21st 2014 12:00PM

One Shots: Top 10 best player screenshots of 2014

Posted on Dec 21st 2014 10:00AM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW