making pendragon F2P is not reasonable because it would take away population from Ywain and change the game. And how many people suggested this? one person in one thread? 2 maybe?

making Ywain F2P is a stupid idea if you ask me, and incredibly game changing.

opening up a test server from time to time, for a limited amount of free play only to test out new patches, is a completely different story. Like I said it could be used to get people back into the game to test and see if they like the new changes. If it became a problem and it was taking population away from Ywain then they could lower the amount of time you get there, and therefore this is completely non-game changing.

Some people just want to win. You use stupid word arguments instead of looking at this problem logically. Therefore I'm an idiot because I can't see how "F2P" is the same as "F2P", they are the same damn thing, right?

 

-----signature-----

Seriously? Why would ANY game company with an already established game that has an already established community of players that play seriously/regularly WHILE paying a monthly subscription turn to giving free play time to part time players for the sake of testing new patches for the people that play every day? WTF???

Even when I could only afford about 4 days a month of game time, I still paid the subscription, and I did it because I love the game and I realise that, without us regular players paying the subscriptions, there would be no DAoC. So Mac, nice try, but either pony up the $15 a month and enjoy what time you DO have to play, or leave the this game behind and find some other game that MIGHT give you something for nothing since you apparently only play this game half-heartedly anyway.

Er, as I said, to IMPROVE the game for their paying customers? I don't _quite_ see what is so hard to grasp about that concept... You do things to improve the game, it generates good will, you get more loyalty, game lasts longer and makes more money.

/boggle?

But it is not ‘good will’ or ‘loyalty’ that you are after. You already said the following:



What you want is a way to play the game for free and the stuff about ‘good will’ and ‘loyalty’ are just hopeful excuses attempting to validate your F2P concept. Just because you want a F2P test server validated as a good idea does not make it so. It is not a good idea. If you want a F2P server there are better ideas than yours on the listed threads of F2P ideas.


You are using buzz words like ‘good will’ and ‘loyalty’ but there is no indication your idea would accomplish any such thing.


I already listed, in longer form in a previous post, the reason below as why a F2P test server is not a good idea. I list them again in a shorter form.


1. Mythic does not care much about the test servers. The test servers are mostly HYPE servers.


2. Limited resources. Mythic has a difficult time simply giving out a Pendragon ring.


3. Using X-players who have little or no understanding of the current game to give feedback to Mythic/Bioware concerning game changes, is silly.


4. Possible harm to the existing population of players like yourself that would cancel and play ever so often on the F2P test server


Again, If you want a F2P server there are better ideas than yours on the listed threads of F2P ideas.

 

-----signature-----

I would not say that you were an idiot except in jest. I have read past post by you that were insightful and intelligent. This time however I think that you missed the mark.


In reading the OPs first post it became apparent to me that the OP is not attempting to improve the game. In the OPs own post the OP states that the main intent is to play for free because the OP feels the game is not worth $15 anymore and the OP does not play very often. Also, I saw many problems with the OPs concept and I have read many of the negatives, in one form or another, on other F2P threads.


While some of the comments on the F2P threads may not be specifically directed at a ‘F2P test server’ idea, they are valid for the OPs idea. Like Mythic/Bioware having limited resources (and being somewhat incompetent). That is a fairly universal concept that would be valid without being directed specifically at a ‘F2P test server’ concept. Then there is the possibility of cannibalizing the live server. Again that concept is in the F2P threads, is fairly universal and need not be specifically directed at the ‘F2P test server’ concept for it to be a valid comment against a ‘F2P test server’ idea. This could go one and on. There are many, many comments on the F2P links that need not be specifically directed at the OPs idea for the comments to be valid for the OPs idea.


The only negative that I think was not on the previously listed F2P threads is ‘having X-players give advice concerning a game they are not current with’, while this additional challenge does damage the OPs idea, other challenges kill the OPs idea and this one is just another straw on the dead camels back.


Overall, there is enough info in the OPs first post for me to see the challenges with the OPs concept, see that most of those challenges are covered in the other F2P threads and to then simply list the previous threads so the OP can do a bit of research. I do not believe that I jumped to any conclusion, on the contrary I saw the OPs post for what it was and I simply did not list out all the possible negatives that are listed in the F2P threads but instead listed links to those threads.


As far as a F2P concept goes, the OPs idea is not a good F2P concept and attempting to implement a ‘F2P test server’ concept would not be a good use of Mythic’s/Bioware’s limited resources. There are better F2P concepts discussed in the F2P threads.

 

-----signature-----

How could you ever think you are improving whatever class is getting patch changes when you don't play said class enough to know what works or doesn't work already? Let's take your logic and use it in another scenario: I like drag racing, I have been involved in drag racing in the past and I would like to drag race again but I don't want to pay for a car. I have made purchases from Summit Racing in the past and since they have a race team they should let me test their race cars whenever they decide to try new parts. That logic is seriously flawed.

Likewise, my friend.

Maybe it depends on how you view the 'limitations' to playing on Pendragon for free. As I said before I am very against a F2P model for DAOC. But looking at the OP, all I see is that every once in a while 50 or so people get to come in and try out a new patch to see if they like it. So yes it seems ridiculous that three people in a row immediately dismiss the idea and put it into the group as all the other F2P threads.

In fact, now i'm convinced that this idea could be brilliant if it had some serious limitations (although probably a lot more than the OP had in mind). What if they give every closed account something like 20 hours of free play on Pendragon, from the time that a patch is first put up for testing until the time that the patch goes live? I don't say this because I want to play for free, but because it could be a good way to attract new players back to the game. Even when my accounts are not active, I am constantly checking for new patches, and why shouldn't you let previous customers get a trail of the new version of your product before they pay full price for it?

 

-----signature-----

I did not immediately dismiss the idea.


When I first read the OPs idea I was intrigued. But for me, I found more negatives than positives to letting people get a feel for the game by checking out the test servers.


As for stress testing, there is an alternative available where Mythic/Bioware can get regular players to log into Pendragon to run stress tests. While the Pendragon ring contest was poorly implemented, there have been past Pendragon events where many, many players transferred toons and made a grand showing. If a test event is implemented correctly the live servers have enough players that will shift to Pendragon to stress test Pendragon.


As for getting advice on new changes, past players, players that have almost no understanding of the current live game, would have a difficult time properly evaluating potential new things that were being tested on Pendragon. Any advice they gave Mythic/Bioware would be suspect. Heck, often advice from players is suspect but this advice would not really even be from active players.


As for players testing out possible new things to see if they would like to return to use the new stuff on a live server, I see some challenges with that too. Many of the things on Pendragon often get a final mod when it is transferred from Pendragon to live. There are not always changes when a patch shifts from the test server to live but many times a buff, spec, spell, damage, etc . . . will change from its final form on Pendragon and be different on live. I have also seen things on Pendragon never make it to a live server and I have tested patches on Pendragon that when the patch went to the live servers the live patch contained changes that were never available for testing, or never mentioned in the notes. So a test server would not really give former players an accurate sample of what a live server would be like.


Then there is the strangeness of the test server. At times I have found areas on the test server where the graphics were not fully installed. I have found, at times, some things did not function properly. The test server is not always stable and can frustrate players. Also, many nice features that are available on the test server are not available on the live servers and for someone that has been away for a long time, that player may get an incorrect impression of what features would be available on the live server should that person be enticed to return and subscribe.


The small population of Pendragon is not really great for giving any prospective player a good feel for the game. Live servers often require the general population be above 1k before critical mass is obtained in the BGs/Frontiers and unless there is a very special Pendragon event there are not usually enough players on Pendragon to give prospective players a good experience.


If the goal is to allow former players to check out the game and see if the former player may want to come back, there is the “Come Back To Camelot” offer. I may not remember the time frame correctly but I believe that it is every 90 days an account is closed it qualifies for a new “Come Back To Camelot” offer with 14 days of FREE playtime on the live and stable servers. IMO the free “Come Back To Camelot” offer would give former players a much better idea of what the real game was like than allowing a former player to log into a test server for a bit of ghost town strangeness.


Chances are the only people that would take advantage of a F2P test server would be the people (like the OP) who rarely play and decided to cancel so they could log into the free test server to get their fix.


So, to summarize and list the points again:

1. There are better existing alternative methods of stress testing.

2. Any advice given by former players would probably not be good advice. If Mythic is interested in getting advice it is better they get that advice from active players who are familiar with the current game.

3. The test server is often wonky and is not a good place for former players to get a feel for what the live game is like.

4. The test server usually has a tiny population.

5. Mythic already gives blocks of free time to former players (closed accounts) so that the former player can check out the live game.

6. The live server is a better place for former players to get a feel of what the live game is like.

 

-----signature-----

I'm not sure I agree with this, as from what I can tell Pendragon absolutely DIED as a play server when they added free RR13. You even admit there is a very low test population. Last patch Mythic had to beg, then bribe, people to test their content. I do not think you are correct in your assessment. I am assuming you are referring to all testing, as this idea has absolutely no correlation with what we typically call "stress" testing. It would never get thousands of people on.



When did "finding bugs" change to "giving advice on mechanics?" Seriously would ANYONE be stupid enough to listen to someone who doesn't actually play send in a report, "Mez seems overly powerful." NO. However, it requires absolutely zero knowledge of the current state of RvR tactics to send a bug report saying, "Quest NPC [soanso] has the following miss-spelled dialog:" I must have submitted 20+ bug reports last patch cycle, and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM got their own patch note. Clearly Mythic cares, or at least cares when the bug report comes from a veteran account with a creation date from beta (maybe they don't listen to normal people, I don't know).



Please READ my post. I want a server were veterans can come and HELP make the game better, so that one day we might want to return. Chances are VERY FEW of these people would subscribe, we are ADULTs now, wife, children, and jobs occupy the majority of our time. People interested in this program would be DONATING their time to make the game better, not looking to have fun playing a game. Honestly, did you actually expect this idea to make Hector PLAYABLE in any way like live? You'd have to be incredibly naive to think that. At most I could see 50 people logged on. With the majority of those TESTING new content, not out RvRing. This would be NOTHING like live, and every single last person who signed up for it would KNOW THAT.



So is this supposed to argue AGAINST getting more people testing? "We hardly have anyone testing, so obviously we shouldn't try and get more people testing." I have no non-inflammatory response to that, so I will leave it.



If anything I think this response SHOWs that you are lumping the suggestion with other F2P models, as you are suggesting that it in any way is associated with live style gameplay.



You're really starting to hurt yourself with this "I read your post" rhetoric. Either you've never taken a reading comprehension course, or your are, as we have been suggesting, simply lumping the post with your preconceptions of f2p.

you dont need players to stress test the game...

EA - Bioware, Mythic's offices probly has a hundred or so of workstations... and if not its easy to build a few powerful computers to handle the task of stress testing...

Build a client that loads without the graphical interface attached, (so it dumps debug text only, no 3d draw... to lessen workload needed to run) have said client preform auto-mated/scripted tasks...

load it 10-100 times per workstation available depending on cpu/ram of the workstations, or just load 1000 copies on a purpose built work station for stress tests...

dont think the idea of botted stress testing has merrit... go ask CCP, they built autonomous bot clients for stress testing changes to eve-online and its been working wonders for them to test and improve situations in eve online that would cause lag.

 

-----signature-----