Please get rid of the zones.

t5universe · November 2017

There are too few players online at the same time, even at peak hours, to defend having different zones.
Surely one zone can handle 300 players?
If not, then it's time to invest in better tech, so the came can come alive again.
All players meet outside the powerhouse, but as fast as you go to any other place on the map, the game feels dead.
Are there any plans for a upgrade? Does the system actually need a upgrade?

fusionax77 · November 2017

The problem with raising the zone cap to 300 is that there's a lot more stress put on whatever instances have that cap. A lot of players doing nothing, despite what you may think, still uses up a ton of resources.

When the zone cap was at 100 and Onslaught Villains were introduced, I believe that Kaizerin (our resident dev) mentioned that the large amounts of population acting all at once resulted in many player actions being completely dropped simply because they couldn't be processed if I recall.

As well, upgrading the server hardware itself isn't as seamless as I'm pretty sure you're assuming it to be.

pantagruel01 · November 2017

The servers could maybe handle 300 people in one zone if those 300 people were spread out (not more than ~100 in any section of the city, not more than ~50 at any one encounter) but it certainly can't handle them all bunching up.

ealford1985 · November 2017

I like being a zone of few...especially farming OV guardians

flyingfinn · November 2017

t5universe said:
There are too few players online at the same time, even at peak hours, to defend having different zones.
Surely one zone can handle 300 players?
If not, then it's time to invest in better tech, so the came can come alive again.
All players meet outside the powerhouse, but as fast as you go to any other place on the map, the game feels dead.
Are there any plans for a upgrade? Does the system actually need a upgrade?

Nope.

spinnytop · November 2017

t5universe said:
Surely one zone can handle 300 players?

That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough*

t5universe · November 2017

Answers like "nope" or "That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough* isn't helpful at all.
You're defending just because...
Instead you shouldn't be content with having a mmo that's light years behind the others.
By defending the bad tech, you'll never get a better game.
I asked if the game needs a overhaul tech wise, and apparently it does.
So, why should the devs invest in better server tech? Duh...that would lead to a more living game, and more paying players.
In my point of view it's just bad business imagining that people will stay if nothing happens.
Defending this is just illogical.

combatclown81 · November 2017

t5universe said:
Answers like "nope" or "That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough* isn't helpful at all.
You're defending just because...
Instead you shouldn't be content with having a mmo that's light years behind the others.
By defending the bad tech, you'll never get a better game.
I asked if the game needs a overhaul tech wise, and apparently it does.
So, why should the devs invest in better server tech? Duh...that would lead to a more living game, and more paying players.
In my point of view it's just bad business imagining that people will stay if nothing happens.
Defending this is just illogical.

You do realize this game is old. Also, having "too few players online at the same time, even at peak hours, to defend having different zones" is not a good thing right? It means the game doesn't make that much money. Why would they invest money to improve it?

blockwave · November 2017

I don't see the problem with zones, alot of MMOs these days have instances, GW2 has some, you just can't switch to another one ,putting money in the game has already been brought up by many players and the answers are the same, it's not worth the cost.

kamokami · November 2017

t5universe said:
Defending this is just illogical.

It's not a question of "we don't want things to be better". We all do. I want this and a 1,000 other things. But if we're to move the discussion past wishes and dreams and into actual implementation...that's where trade offs and cost and "what could be done instead?" come in and that's where an idea like this gets "nope!"

Because if we're actually talking about doing this, then we'd prefer that time and money to be spent on doing something else.

beezeeze · November 2017

t5universe said:
Defending this is just illogical.

This is an old game in a niche genre... it isn't that all these people are defending an outdated system it is more that most of the folks around here have simply come to accept what we can reasonably expect from our small team of devs. There are several valid reasons for the zones being capped the way they are and that is unlikely to ever change.

It's alight to reach for the stars but remember to keep your feet planted firmly on the ground.

kamokami · November 2017

I mean if we want to stick to wishes and dreams, then I'd prefer that the game be made available on consoles with essentially a mini re-launch level of marketing with messaging being heavily focused on customization.

It's been several years of trying new games and there's still nothing that comes close to CO in this regard imo.

markhawkman · November 2017

Also, the game is designed around the concept of instances. taking those away would have a significant impact on the way the game plays.

xrazamax · November 2017

^Yeah. Unless I'm mistaken, content is also currently designed around the zone caps. 300 zone cap would mean 300 players able to fight Mega Destroyer OM or 300 players fighting an Onslaught Villain. Or 300 Onslaught Villains fighting each other. That isn't even considering leaving the zones open for other events like Clarence's OM.

t5universe · November 2017

Strange that it works on other mmos.

roughbearmattach · November 2017

Those mmos are built differently.

pantagruel01 · November 2017

t5universe said:
Strange that it works on other mmos.

Not as well as you might think; a lot of what CO is doing with open world encounters would in most MMOs be instanced raids with player counts no higher than what CO manages. This is not to say Cryptic server architecture couldn't be improved, but, well, the budget for improvement is pretty closely connected to the number of players online.

markhawkman · November 2017

Actually setting the pop limit to 300 in a Cryptic Zone would be a lot easier if it was a strictly no-combat zone.

sterga · November 2017

The game can't even handle 65 player zone caps during events.

It's not just hardware. This game is older and the terrible code is something that comes up from time to time. I would not be surprised if there where so many non-hardware issues with the game that they are impossible to correct at this point barring creating a new game from scratch.

We'll probably see a Torchlight MMO before CO gets an update like that.

spinnytop · November 2017

t5universe said:
Strange that it works on other mmos.

That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough*

draogn · November 2017

The game would need better servers and engine before they could even begin to make this change. For that kind of thing to happen it would require time and better resources. We don't get much now as is, that kind of change would result in CO getting even less content.

flyingfinn · November 2017

t5universe said:
Answers like "nope" or "That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough* isn't helpful at all.
You're defending just because...
Instead you shouldn't be content with having a mmo that's light years behind the others.
By defending the bad tech, you'll never get a better game.
I asked if the game needs a overhaul tech wise, and apparently it does.
So, why should the devs invest in better server tech? Duh...that would lead to a more living game, and more paying players.
In my point of view it's just bad business imagining that people will stay if nothing happens.
Defending this is just illogical.

So i need to change my answer to 'Yes'. Would that make things better?
Since been in this game over 8 years one gains a bit of knowledge what is and what is not going to happen.
I could write a Wall of Text for a wider explanation, but threads like these can be counted in dozens in the past years.
With same questions, answers and same ideas of needed improvements.
I just saved a lot of time and trouble with a short and reality based answer.
I bet with a little effort you could have found all the answers in the Forum.

draogn · November 2017

flyingfinn said:

t5universe said:
Answers like "nope" or "That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough* isn't helpful at all.
You're defending just because...
Instead you shouldn't be content with having a mmo that's light years behind the others.
By defending the bad tech, you'll never get a better game.
I asked if the game needs a overhaul tech wise, and apparently it does.
So, why should the devs invest in better server tech? Duh...that would lead to a more living game, and more paying players.
In my point of view it's just bad business imagining that people will stay if nothing happens.
Defending this is just illogical.
So i need to change my answer to 'Yes'. Would that make things better?
Since been in this game over 8 years one gains a bit of knowledge what is and what is not going to happen.
I could write a Wall of Text for a wider explanation, but threads like these can be counted in dozens in the past years.
With same questions, answers and same ideas of needed improvements.
I just saved a lot of time and trouble with a short and reality based answer.
I bet with a little effort you could have found all the answers in the Forum.

To be fair these forums are outdated and suck. So it might not be as easy to find. Especially since a lot of the posts from the old forums are gone.

monaahiru · November 2017

I think terrible lag and DC may happen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DkLVWTB7PY

I've got DCed after this event so easily. No idea how many people we had in zone at this time.

t5universe · November 2017

So the chances of a CO2 being in development is pretty much null?
Seems strange that a mmo company doesn't want to continue evolving, that's just bad business.
You won't get more players unless you evolve.

pantagruel01 · November 2017

t5universe said:
So the chances of a CO2 being in development is pretty much null?

Yes.

t5universe said:
Seems strange that a mmo company doesn't want to continue evolving, that's just bad business.
You won't get more players unless you evolve.

They are continuing to evolve. It's just that the direction of evolution doesn't happen to involve CO2. Games only get sequels if they're popular enough that the sequel seems likely to be profitable, and while CO isn't dead, it also doesn't have the 10k+ PCU required to justify a sequel.

flyingfinn · November 2017

draogn said:

flyingfinn said:

t5universe said:
Answers like "nope" or "That is a well thought out statement if I've ever seen one. *cough* isn't helpful at all.
You're defending just because...
Instead you shouldn't be content with having a mmo that's light years behind the others.
By defending the bad tech, you'll never get a better game.
I asked if the game needs a overhaul tech wise, and apparently it does.
So, why should the devs invest in better server tech? Duh...that would lead to a more living game, and more paying players.
In my point of view it's just bad business imagining that people will stay if nothing happens.
Defending this is just illogical.
So i need to change my answer to 'Yes'. Would that make things better?
Since been in this game over 8 years one gains a bit of knowledge what is and what is not going to happen.
I could write a Wall of Text for a wider explanation, but threads like these can be counted in dozens in the past years.
With same questions, answers and same ideas of needed improvements.
I just saved a lot of time and trouble with a short and reality based answer.
I bet with a little effort you could have found all the answers in the Forum.
To be fair these forums are outdated and suck. So it might not be as easy to find. Especially since a lot of the posts from the old forums are gone.

sshhhh....Let's not ruin the little effort.

t5universe · November 2017

pantagruel01 said:
Games only get sequels if they're popular enough that the sequel seems likely to be profitable, and while CO isn't dead, it also doesn't have the 10k+ PCU required to justify a sequel.

And it never will if they don't bother to make the game feel more alive.
Yesterday the northern Canada zone had a population high of 17 players.

According your (and others) logic, this game can't handle a couple of hundred players in one zone...in other words, if the game had a 10K population it would crash. That doesen't make sense.
You can't have a game with such a terrible technology. Even COH had far more players in one zone at a time, and their version of the engine was older.

A Champions 2.0 with a unreal engine would be a cash cow. Better characters, more realistic textures on the environment (nature and buildings), weather, and over-all atmosphere.
And instead of just thinking like a sheep and accepting the game's standard as it is, show the devs that you want a higher standard of game.

jaazaniah1 · November 2017

So much this! Have you ever tried to farm OV Guardians? Always fun to find that someone else beat you to them and you might not be able to complete the mission. Having multiple instances makes this far less likely to happen.

OTOH it would be amusing to watch 300 people crowding around Defender in MC

ealford1985 said:
I like being a zone of few...especially farming OV guardians

draogn · November 2017

t5universe said:

pantagruel01 said:
Games only get sequels if they're popular enough that the sequel seems likely to be profitable, and while CO isn't dead, it also doesn't have the 10k+ PCU required to justify a sequel.
And it never will if they don't bother to make the game feel more alive.
Yesterday the northern Canada zone had a population high of 17 players.

According your (and others) logic, this game can't handle a couple of hundred players in one zone...in other words, if the game had a 10K population it would crash. That doesen't make sense.
You can't have a game with such a terrible technology. Even COH had far more players in one zone at a time, and their version of the engine was older.

A Champions 2.0 with a unreal engine would be a cash cow. Better characters, more realistic textures on the environment (nature and buildings), weather, and over-all atmosphere.
And instead of just thinking like a sheep and accepting the game's standard as it is, show the devs that you want a higher standard of game.

The unreal engine is overrated. Just as calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a sheep is an over used tripe.

Those numbers you listed don't take into account people in alerts, instances, lairs, quest maps, or switching from character to character. That isn't to say the games population is good, it certainly isn't. But what you're asking for isn't simple or cheap. As such it isn't really worth the companies time to do for CO.

t5universe · November 2017

If we let, cheap and easy, be the reasons for not doing a thing, then we wouldn't have had any MMO.
The Unreal Engine in the right hands can do wonders. It's all just a matter of imagination, time and the foresight to make the game more modern, and thus more profitable.
You have to spend money in order to earn more money.
It's logical to assume that every current subscriber would recommend this game to new players if it evolved.
I find it weird that people defend the status quo and just shrug their proverbial shoulders, "This is how it is."
Don't get me wrong, I love this game, and that is why I want it to evolve.
There is no reason to just accept that this game should die.
A modern version of this game would take the mmo world by storm.
Lots of gamers are waiting for it.
Cryptic, dare more, earn more.

aiqa · November 2017

I think most people here want CO to grow. But lots of people also have a bit of an idea of what is reasonable by now. And big engine upgrades (and balancing all fights to scale from a dozen to a few hundred players) are just not in the cards.

jonesing4 · November 2017

> @t5universe said:
>
> You have to spend money in order to earn more money.

True, for the most part. But spending money doesn’t guarantee making money. Not sure why you are ignoring that part.

> It's logical to assume that every current subscriber would recommend this game to new players if it evolved.

No, it isn’t “logical” to assume anywhere near a 100% rate of recommendation for anything, let alone a niche, almost 10-year-old game.

> There is no reason to just accept that this game should die.

Sure there is: it’s a video game, and video games die. For the most part, the only games that keep more than a few hundred people playing them 10 years after they came out are reeeeeeally good, classic games. Even at its height, CO wasn’t that game.

And again, you’re misunderstanding/twisting what people have said. We aren’t saying it’s a dead game that’s going sunset soon. We’re saying that this level of development (steady trickle, occasional new shinies, few if any periods of total void) is as much as we’re going to get. You are free to live in your own fantasy where CO is something more than this, but there’s no need to be insulting to people who have been around long enough to know better.

revanantmorituri · November 2017

Also remember Cryptic has games that are more popular, with more updated forms of the engine: Star Trek and Neverwinter. These games also have a 50 person zone cap, As games progress, environmental and character textures improve, along with screen resolution, faster than server technology progresses. Yes, back in the day, Final Fantasy 11 boasted open world events with 2-300 players, but their art quality was vastly lower (Targeted at the 640x480 console screens of the time), with what were considered acceptable graphics compromises (very rectangular mitten-hands).

For the time being, we have to accept that the MMO genre has taken a huge population hit from the development of addictive smartphone games. One it is unlikely to recover from until the development of truly immersive VR gaming.

beezeeze · November 2017

t5universe said:
show the devs that you want a higher standard of game.

How exactly?

Do I just gotta say, Hey devs make this game more better.
Is that it? Did I do it?
Wonderful. We sure showed them.

nepht · November 2017

t5universe said:
There are too few players online at the same time, even at peak hours, to defend having different zones.
Surely one zone can handle 300 players?
If not, then it's time to invest in better tech, so the came can come alive again.
All players meet outside the powerhouse, but as fast as you go to any other place on the map, the game feels dead.
Are there any plans for a upgrade? Does the system actually need a upgrade?

Its an old game thats only playerbase seems to be the denizens of Fur Affinity. Cryptic has more successful games to run. CO is its pet game that it keeps online because Cryptic always has to have a 4 color mmo around.

pantagruel01 · November 2017

t5universe said:
According your (and others) logic, this game can't handle a couple of hundred players in one zone...in other words, if the game had a 10K population it would crash.

Nah, it would just have a large number of instances of each zone, each with its own zone cap. At launch MC had a zone cap of 100 and we'd see MC#25; counting people in instances and other zones that's in the 10k range.

jonsills · November 2017

I don't think t5 has a real grasp of the way instances work here. Or of the complexities of software engineering, or hardware replacement (hint: it's more comparable to pulling the engine from a Chevy and replacing it with one from a Porsche, than to the process of changing out your old cell phone for a new one).

As for instance caps, I'm not certain, but I think the cap limit in STO, a much more populous (and popular) game than this one, is around 50 players. There are typically double-digit numbers of instances of Earth Spacedock (many people avoid it not because of its population levels one way or the other, but because Zone Chat in ESD sometimes makes Barrens Chat look civilized). I really don't think the 100-toon limit in CO is causing any of its problems, except during events when it can cause graphic problems (because the system tries to allocate resources to display every toon in the entire Zone, just in case).

riverocean · November 2017

Not going to happen... Ever. The current zone structure was implemented because having more than 50 players in an event caused serious issues. CO's engine and servers simply couldn't handle it.

The devs have been really honest with us about this game and it's status. This is an 8 year old low population game. Superhero MMO's in general don't age well. We're lucky the game hasn't been mothballed.

Yes, architecture improvements would be nice. No one is saying we wouldn't enjoy them. But as it's been explained they are highly unlikely.

kjodell · November 2017

Yesterday the northern Canada zone had a population high of 17 players.

Just like the real Canada.

t5universe · November 2017

It's interesting to see the defeatist atmosphere here.
Clearly you have accepted the game's quality as it is.
I just wanted to know. Now I have the answer.

magpieuk2014 · November 2017

It's not defeatist, we just know how many people play the game, how many could be attracted back, how much money they might spend. The game chugs along, there's some new stuff now and then, and people seem to be quite fond of it.... could be worse.

nepht · November 2017

t5universe said:
It's interesting to see the defeatist atmosphere here.
Clearly you have accepted the game's quality as it is.
I just wanted to know. Now I have the answer.

PWE has a policy of games living within their means. If your idea went through with brand new servers and all that jazz it would be fantastic for about one week before the game burns through its cash and ends up getting shut down.
PWE is more than fair to CO.

markhawkman · November 2017

nepht said:

t5universe said:
It's interesting to see the defeatist atmosphere here.
Clearly you have accepted the game's quality as it is.
I just wanted to know. Now I have the answer.
PWE has a policy of games living within their means. If your idea went through with brand new servers and all that jazz it would be fantastic for about one week before the game burns through its cash and ends up getting shut down.
PWE is more than fair to CO.

So much this, the OP's suggestion is wishful thinking.

sterga · November 2017

t5universe wrote: »

It's interesting to see the defeatist atmosphere here.
Clearly you have accepted the game's quality as it is.
I just wanted to know. Now I have the answer.

There is nothing we can do about how Cryptic and PW choose to run /develop their game. You can claim "defeatist atmosphere" all you want, but most people are being realistic in explaining why your wish list isn't going to happen. If you choose to remain naive, well... have fun with that.

spinnytop · November 2017

t5universe said:
So the chances of a CO2 being in development is pretty much null?
Seems strange that a mmo company doesn't want to continue evolving, that's just bad business.
You won't get more players unless you evolve.

You know they have multiple games currently ongoing right? One is a Star Trek game, and the other is a Dungeons and Dragons game. Is having those two licenses bad business?

t5universe said:
It's interesting to see the defeatist atmosphere here.

This is where folks like you always end up in these kinds of threads, accusing everyone of having given up and not caring simply because we have actual answers to your questions rather than all just jumping aboard your magical dream express. Well, you'll be gone next week and everyone will have forgotten you and your short-lived crusade, and the people in this thread who responded to you will still be here actually helping to keep this game afloat. So say what you like, then move along.

jonsills · November 2017

Any time I see a non-programmer claim coding something would be "easy", I think of this xkcd:

spinnytop · November 2017

I could swear I remember posts from gradii in the past criticizing people who no longer play the game for hanging around the forums and making "this game sucks" posts ^_^

guyhumual · November 2017

I don't understand why you'd want 300+ people in one zone to begin with.

Please get rid of the zones.

Comments