1. #1561
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    They'll merge some, yes. But the merged servers are all on the same playing field in terms of when players could start playing, and they've grouped them into clusters to make merges more predictable. Mergers are pretty much a practical reality and that's fine, and Amazon have done their best to mitigate the negative impacts of them and try to reduce the number of mergers. If we were to listen to folks complaining about queues we'd have 100 more servers that would make merging an absolute nightmare for literally everyone.

    Right now people want to play and not sit in queues, but those queues will naturally go away in the coming days/weeks. Again, spinning up 100 new servers just so folks don't have to wait in queues at launch is a silly, foolish, and makes zero business sense since it's a huge added expense, with a huge added secondary expense of closing down and merging them that will absolutely cause players to freak out and get angry.

    Who cares if "some random guild transfers to a new server to control the economy?"? Literally everyone on the new servers. This isn't just about YOU and you wanting to get in and play without queues, which everyone has to deal with. This is about the game and the long term community around it.

    That we're still in this position after decades of MMO launches being exactly like this, with some studios like BW foolishly opening upwards of 100 servers to handle launch queues (which weren't even the primary problem, the crush was causing server instability that New World simply isn't facing) only to have to shutter most of them fairly quickly and piss communities off isn't exactly a winning strategy for the company - due to the added cost and time spend - or the players - who benefit more from having stable server communities, especially in a game with an almost exclusively player driven economy.
    So the solution is to just let only 1/3 of the player base play and 2/3 of the player base sit in queues because of the sacred "economy"? They have to fix this. And no the solution is not to wait 3 weeks for everyone to quit because they are sick of waiting hours in queue.

  2. #1562
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Server costs for Amazon are vastly different than your average company. Probably due to their size in the server/cloud industry.
    Totally, but the point still remains: Why spend the money to spin up another 50 servers just to handle the launch rush, knowing full well that the majority will end up ghost towns needing to be merged? And given that the economies on servers will likely be fairly different given the different communities on each, trying to merge two will be a big issue for the economies alone, much less the territorial balance that existed on each server. Those are harder challenges for them to deal with since they can't really do anything specifically to resolve them and they'll need to work themselves out over time as the two server communities sort things out naturally.

    Even outside of the server costs, it's simply not a really smart longterm plan. Launch complaints about servers/queues are extremely temporary, and history has shown us that panicking and spamming new servers, even in games where merges aren't as potentially chaotic/problematic, doesn't benefit the game itself in the slightest. It's an expensive way to quell complaints about queues for a week or so, but that's about it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Clozer View Post
    They have to fix this. And no the solution is not to wait 3 weeks for everyone to quit because they are sick of waiting hours in queue.
    They don't, and that's literally the solution, though not because everyone will quit. Some will quit, others will settle into their normal gaming habits with server concurrency dropping as folks aren't spending their week off on vacation playing all day. You don't have to like it, but that's the best solution for the health of the game overall.

  3. #1563
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Totally, but the point still remains: Why spend the money to spin up another 50 servers just to handle the launch rush, knowing full well that the majority will end up ghost towns needing to be merged? And given that the economies on servers will likely be fairly different given the different communities on each, trying to merge two will be a big issue for the economies alone, much less the territorial balance that existed on each server. Those are harder challenges for them to deal with since they can't really do anything specifically to resolve them and they'll need to work themselves out over time as the two server communities sort things out naturally.

    Even outside of the server costs, it's simply not a really smart longterm plan. Launch complaints about servers/queues are extremely temporary, and history has shown us that panicking and spamming new servers, even in games where merges aren't as potentially chaotic/problematic, doesn't benefit the game itself in the slightest. It's an expensive way to quell complaints about queues for a week or so, but that's about it.

    - - - Updated - - -



    They don't, and that's literally the solution, though not because everyone will quit. Some will quit, others will settle into their normal gaming habits with server concurrency dropping as folks aren't spending their week off on vacation playing all day. You don't have to like it, but that's the best solution for the health of the game overall.
    I’d honestly just increase the capacity and then contract it if no longer needed.

  4. #1564
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    This is infinitely childish.

    Playing a game from the start means nothing.
    Do you take everything so literally?

    This screams of an obv play on the humor of mmorpg players, next time i'll add a bright pink flashing neon sign above it screaming this is a joke.
    looking out of my lonely room day after day

  5. #1565
    Quote Originally Posted by Clozer View Post
    So the solution is to just let only 1/3 of the player base play and 2/3 of the player base sit in queues because of the sacred "economy"? They have to fix this. And no the solution is not to wait 3 weeks for everyone to quit because they are sick of waiting hours in queue.
    No. This is a transitory issue. It's meaningless.

  6. #1566
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    They don't, and that's literally the solution, though not because everyone will quit. Some will quit, others will settle into their normal gaming habits with server concurrency dropping as folks aren't spending their week off on vacation playing all day. You don't have to like it, but that's the best solution for the health of the game overall.
    Sorry but having 2/3 of the players sit in queues right now is 100% is not the way to secure the long-term health of the game. I can't disagree more.

  7. #1567
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    I’d honestly just increase the capacity and then contract it if no longer needed.
    I think they already did, and opened some new servers. But again, throwing tons of resources at what they know will be a very temporary problem doesn't make any sense.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Clozer View Post
    Sorry but having 2/3 of the players sit in queues right now is 100% is not the way to secure the long-term health of the game. I can't disagree more.
    2/3? Why do you keep repeating this number? Best I can tell there are at least 200+ global servers (too lazy to count exactly), and with 2K capacity that's over 400K people in the game worlds. With a concurrency around 700K right now, that's >50% of people logged into Steam being in servers.

  8. #1568
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    I think they already did, and opened some new servers. But again, throwing tons of resources at what they know will be a very temporary problem doesn't make any sense.

    - - - Updated - - -



    2/3? Why do you keep repeating this number? Best I can tell there are at least 200+ global servers (too lazy to count exactly), and with 2K capacity that's over 400K people in the game worlds. With a concurrency around 700K right now, that's >50% of people logged into Steam being in servers.
    A couple of hours ago before I started my 6-hour queue adventure every server in my region had a queue of at least 1k people up to 16k people. With 2k people on each Server... Yeah, there are sitting way more people in queue than are playing.

  9. #1569
    Quote Originally Posted by xpsync View Post
    Do you take everything so literally?

    This screams of an obv play on the humor of mmorpg players, next time i'll add a bright pink flashing neon sign above it screaming this is a joke.
    Given a lot of your previous posts, no, it didn't at all seem like a joke lol

  10. #1570
    i enjoyed what i've played but if the plan is to just have players give up before they got a chance to even try it(after having paid for it).. then they're entering scam territory.
    sure the servers run smooth. they only allow 2k people(while an inifinite amount can sign up to join them). and they don't even have enough servers available to house half of their paying customers.
    I had fun once, it was terrible.

  11. #1571
    Been watching Sacriel play for a few hours now (the drops for the game help lol), and I give the sound design team big props for their work.

  12. #1572
    Quote Originally Posted by Lex Icon View Post
    i enjoyed what i've played but if the plan is to just have players give up before they got a chance to even try it(after having paid for it).. then they're entering scam territory.
    sure the servers run smooth. they only allow 2k people(while an inifinite amount can sign up to join them). and they don't even have enough servers available to house half of their paying customers.
    Exactly. Even classic WoW had a better launch.

  13. #1573
    Quote Originally Posted by Clozer View Post
    Exactly. Even classic WoW had a better launch.
    https://www.techradar.com/news/wow-c...emane-to-herod

    Yet still had tons of servers with queues that could run upwards of 3 hours. Almost like this is something every MMO faces at launch, and that server stability is prioritized over getting folks through queues quickly since like, nobody likes their servers crashing all the time and losing progress.

  14. #1574
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Given a lot of your previous posts, no, it didn't at all seem like a joke lol
    Understandable
    looking out of my lonely room day after day

  15. #1575
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    I’d honestly just increase the capacity and then contract it if no longer needed.
    and then face complaints about too many players in one area and quests being undoable and mobs being camped 24/7

  16. #1576
    Quote Originally Posted by Delever View Post
    and then face complaints about too many players in one area and quests being undoable and mobs being camped 24/7
    Plus potential server instability, which is something the game hasn't really seen so far thanks to them keeping the caps lower. Nothing makes the community happy like opening the flood gates a little bit, crashing the server, and sending EVERYONE back to the queue with what is likely some lost progress due to the crash : |

  17. #1577
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Plus potential server instability, which is something the game hasn't really seen so far thanks to them keeping the caps lower. Nothing makes the community happy like opening the flood gates a little bit, crashing the server, and sending EVERYONE back to the queue with what is likely some lost progress due to the crash : |
    I just wonder when will people finally accept that MMO launch days are always like this. I ve played nearly every MMO released since 2006 most of which I played on release day and launch days have always been a mess.
    Some of them had unstable servers (for me that is personally the worst)
    Some had long queues
    Some had massive lag
    Some had too many people funneled in spors making the game unplayable
    And the list goes on and on and on...
    So these days honestly I ll take a smooth server with queues any day of the week. You cannot avoid it so might as well make it a smooth experience once you re able to get in.

  18. #1578
    People acting like new servers aren't being added for the rush time.

    https://twitter.com/playnewworld/sta...82909465481216

  19. #1579
    https://www.reddit.com/r/newworldgam...rs_waiting_in/

    After playing the betas/alphas I expected this to happen, but they still deserve the shit they get from the community for it. With better planning, they could have avoided this.

  20. #1580
    Quote Originally Posted by Clozer View Post
    https://www.reddit.com/r/newworldgam...rs_waiting_in/

    After playing the betas/alphas I expected this to happen, but they still deserve the shit they get from the community for it. With better planning, they could have avoided this.
    How many times do you have to be told that throwing massive resources at temporary problem, especially when the "solution" of throwing more servers at launch (which they're doing) causes more problems later, is a terrible solution for literally everyone except players in the very short term?

    It's like the first time people have played a MMO at launch for petes sake. Ain't nobody got patience and shit no more.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •