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

Reader Comments (71)

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 2:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"...this happens with EVERY major MMO launch"

Which makes you wonder: why they stick to this model?

Why not allow chars to be portable. I have seen a system of different servers with a break down within them called channels (sub-servers).

The chars are portable across the channels but not servers. The number of channels can be adjusted dynamically allowing for growth of the intial flood but prevent the problems of being stuck on a dead server.

You'd have less servers at launch but more dynamic control and thus less dead servers when or if that happens.

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 5:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Like Trion does with Rift - free instantaneous character transfers. Rift limits it to characters over 10 and once/week, but those limitations are likely arbitrary.
Reply

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 5:26PM Lateris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
People should complain about having to type...

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 6:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Notice how he says they are taking queues "very seriously" and "monitoring" but not "doing x, y, and z" about it.

Maybe lock some of the overpopulated servers from having accounts with no characters on them already start on them? Maybe offering character transfers already? Something?

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 11:18PM Tizmah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) If they allowed transfers already, don't you think that would add even more to the load? Goodness...think...
Reply

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 9:39PM Valkenr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's nice to see the whole point of pre-launch setup going up in flames.

Guilds where autoplaced to prevent population problems, but they forgot to include all the other people

This game should give players no choice on where they go. Every player should be auto assigned to a server unless they are invited to one of the 'closed' servers.

A single super server for each region would be the best way to fix all the problems, and should be how every game is set up, there's no reason to split the population up. I like having special open PvP servers(i play on them), but 95% of the open pvp is a-holes going after people they outlevel, so i'm fine without it.

It's funny how many people are standing behind BioWare and acting like they are infallible. Unless you want someone to bend you over a chair, you don't defend them for doing it.

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 11:19PM Tizmah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Valkenr No, then people couldn't join each other.
Reply

Posted: Dec 19th 2011 11:35PM Ragemaster9999 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Valkenr

I abandoned my first server, the fat man, due to long que time of over an hour. The problem here is they are trying to balance initial demand with longterm population health, using a fixed inflexible server system.

I predict alot of people will leave after the first few months depending on how good(or bad) the endgame is. Alot of people will also leave right away if the que times are unacceptable. Nobody pays to wait to play, im sorry. I dont have a problem with them opening excess servers now, as long as they can quickly merge/transfer off later.

The most important thing is people want to play and have fun, and if theres huge ques, thats not going to happen.
Reply

Posted: Dec 20th 2011 8:05AM Cyroselle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's the tough balance. Open too many servers and you risk having to merge a few in the future once all the hubbub has died down.

...but the gaming/investing public tends to take server merging as a bad sign and may withdraw support if you do this.

On the other hand long queue times can turn people off and you run the risk of having a portion of your customer base generate some very bad press or if frustration grows unabated, simply canceling their subscriptions early.

Posted: Dec 20th 2011 9:02AM toothball said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
15 minutes is the longest queue time that i think is reasonable. 1 hour + queues and remembering that Hickman and the other clowns that ruined WAR are now working on this game will easily have me ditching this game after 1 month.

I want to play when i want to play. I don't think that's an unreasonable request.

Posted: Dec 20th 2011 9:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They need to get rid of ques and just LIMIT new characters. Not say "warning this server is full, are you sure you want to make a character here?" but actually PREVENT new characters from being added to already high population servers!
You snooze you loose, period.

Also, making MORE servers will help.

Also, whats worse is that WOW has less than 140 servers I believe and never has ques. It isnt as super grtaphics as swtor is, but thats because WOW can hold 20-25k players per server at a time, at max.

Anyone know the amount of players swtor cheapo servers can hold??


Also, is the LAGGGGGG and glitchiness that happend a few weeks ago during the Beta "stress test" weekend days - STILL happening now with teh release?

Just curious because if they havent OPTIMIZED the servers more efficiently in the last month, I'll wait untl they do since i dont have a fiber optice connection and a $5000 PC lol

Let me know if you know ASAP! Thanks
!

S!

Featured Stories

MMO Week in Review: ArcheAge has arrived

Posted on Sep 14th 2014 8:00PM

EVE Evolved: Has the industry revamp worked?

Posted on Sep 14th 2014 6:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW