Want To Play The Multiplayer FPS Games You Bought?

Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial discussing why it's sometimes impossible to play multiplayer FPS titles as the developers intended it. The author argues: "I certainly don't think that every mod I've ever run across is better than the core game that ships in the box but yet there's often no one running the boxed game", before noting that most game publishers "...do not run their own servers for these games so you can't count on them supporting the boxed game either. There are exceptions to this rule but for the most part when it comes to PC games, you're at the whims of the many fan owned and operated servers... [which may] limit the maps to a select few in a deathmatch game or change the settings of the game to make it play very differently from what you expect."

Comments

This is a good thing

[obeythefist]

What it shows is that, if you have a situation like CounterStrike where the modded game servers way outnumber Half-Life game servers, the customer is really showing the publishers what they want.

It's rare nowadays to see market forces so easily detectable and free from the controls of the publishing monstrosities.

Re:This is a good thing

[cbirdsong64]

Mods are a very good thing, yes, but the companies should not leave it to the fanbase to run all the game's servers. EA runs many Battlefield Vietnam servers, without any sort of tweaks or oddball mods, so I know I can play there if I have a free half hour or so.

Re:This is a good thing

[Grand]

but the one problem with this is that Battlefield mods gain popularity, then EA makes the same 'mod' and then sells it. They first saw the popularity of mods with more weapons and vehicles, so they came out with Secret Weapons. EOD was a pretty popular mod, then came BFV. Now they are coming out with Modern Combat for a clone of Desert Combat. I also heard they are coming out with a starwars clone. Yes it makes them money, but they totally screw over the modding community. I refreshed the EOD servers the other week and there were just a handfull of servers available with people playing. If no one is playing the 'free mods' why would the modders even bother continuing with development.

You also get more for your money. You may not like all the mod's, but at least there are more variations to choose from. So if the game does get 'old and boring' you can try something new.

Re:This is a good thing

[Goldberg's Pants]

What you're forgetting is that Electronic Arts are the epitome of evil and represent everything that is wrong with the game industry.

I was going to say about Counterstrike (parent of the parent mentions it... Or maybe the parent of the parent of the parent. I've clicked now. I forget.) I was a HUGE Team Fortress Classic nut. The instant CS started to take hold, the servers dwindled, and dwindled, and dwindled. Back in the day there were around 2000-3000 TFC servers. These days, while CS still has a ton, you're lucky if you can find a couple of hundred TFC servers. Even MORE lucky if you can find one that has humans, not bots playing on it. (For those unaware, Team Fortress was a free addon for Half Life, put out by Valve. You couldn't patch the game without installing TFC, so it was essentially part of the boxed version really.

And everyone buggered off to play Campers'r'Us on Counterstrike. Don't get me wrong, CS is fun, but nowhere near as fun as TFC was.

Re:This is a good thing

[Babbster]

So, should EA then not develop expansions for their games? People don't HAVE to buy them, you know. As has already been stated, this is freedom of choice in action. If more people are playing the company-created mods/expansions than are playing the user-created mods, then it's probably because they prefer the former. It's not like EA was necessarily stealing from the user-mod community. They would have had expansions and sequels in some stage of development for BF42 before the thing went gold.

Then again, this is the kind of mentality that's out there in many areas of the computer world. If it's put out by a company for profit then it's somehow evil - unless, of course, it's the company for which one is working.

Atari/Epic are a notable exception

[Spiffae]

Whenever I play UT2004 online, I almost always play on an "ATARI/EPIC OFFICIAL EAST #" server - I am guaranteed the game as they intended it, with no extra distractions, and a fast consistent connection.

I think it's a very good idea for them, and I think other game developers should be thinking along the same lines.

Re:Atari/Epic are a notable exception

[shadowcabbit]

Only problem with that is, the game [UT] ships with dozens of mutators-- always has, always will.

How exactly do we know that the "official" server is playing the way "the creators intended"? Has CliffyB come down and said, "OK, guys, our official, canon gameplay is to ignore all of the kickass mods and 0wnage maps we provided to our players and just go with this vanilla setup"?

There's something to be said for having a baseline, true, but there's also a damn good reason FPS games almost always come with the server software.

Re:Atari/Epic are a notable exception

[apoc.famine]

While there is something to be said for "stock" servers, one major issue is that for hardcore gamers, they get boring fast. When you've played all the maps fifty times, you're often ready for something new.

On our server, we run Mapvote with fairly expansive options. While we have a lot of mods and user-created maps, all the stock options are there as well. If enough people are feeling nostalgic, they are welcome to choose them.

Well, that is, other than the Matrix Moves. That's one mod that's been a standard on all of our UT servers. Why? Because the tranny is a cheep way to travel without getting shot at, and the Matrix Moves requires a great deal of skill. Granted Epic nerfed the tranny in the last two editions, but still, if you aren't on a map ¼ of the time, that's a pretty lame way to play a FPS. We'd rather jump and bound, hover in the air and wallrun, because at bare minimum people can splat us while we do that. And vice versa.

Oh, this was about stock servers...sorry - can't help you there. Stock servers often suck (see tranny rant above) and the only way to get a decent server is to make one.

Incidentally, while our UT2K4 server isn't fully up to speed, (PhD thesis defenses, astrophysics research projects, etc) and it is kind of empty because we don't show on the "vanilla" master server list, you can find it listed as the Apoc Matrix Moves Official Server at 128.151.144.195:8000 (The moves were coded in-house by our own Apoc Death, and a total-conversion Matrix mod using his Matrix Moves placed 4th in the Make Something Unreal contest.)

Savage

[MegaT]

Savage is a team FPS where one player commands the team RTS style. There's a linux version available which I've found tends to run faster than its windows counterpart. As far as this game goes, the balance is so subtle that any changes made by server admins can completely ruin the dynamics of the game... fortunately this rarely happens and I think s2games run quite a number of servers themselves (though I don't use them because I'm in europe).

Simple...

[ooPo]

...run your own server. Then you can play the way you want instead of crying about people who run their own server to play the way they want.

I REALLY hate instagib, but who am I to tell them how to run their own server? Sheesh.

Not an issue

[Lord_Dweomer]

Ok, I really think this is NOT as big an issue as people want it to be. For any decently popular online FPS, there WILL be plenty of servers. Look at bf1942, it has thousands. And thousands more for Desert Combat.

You almost NEVER have a problem finding a server that's fun to play on. The real server problems arise with the new mods that MIGHT have good potential, but unfortunately only a few servers......and only a few good ones out of those. Forgotten Hope is a good example, as is Pirates.

Finding a balance

[Anonymous Coward]

As with so many things, this issue isn't as simple as it first appears. Certainly, where "official" servers are offered for an fps, I tend to use them. The servers for Battlefield 1942 are a good example here.

However... running servers isn't free and, if you plan to do it on a large scale, it isn't particularly cheap either. With something like Battlefield 1942, megabucks publishers like EA currently seem willing to foot the bill for hosting these servers. However, I doubt that many of the smaller companies out there can afford to to this on the scale that their game might need.

Ultimately, I wouldn't be surprised to see the online fps market moving in the same direction as the MMORPG market; with customers paying monthly fees (albeit probably a bit lower than the fees for MMORPGs) and being restricted to official servers. GSPs that have tried to implement a pay-to-play policy, such as Barrysworld, have unfortunately failed miserably, but once the publishers start implementing this, things might change. Indeed, I'd see the (very successful) X-box Live as already being a slight move in this direction.

Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily. At least, not for gamers like myself, with an income sufficient that I don't mind a few pounds a month on monthly fees if it ensures a quality service. I've virtually given up on playing fpses online these days, owing to the difficulty of finding decent servers with pleasant settings and admins who aren't on a power-trip. Ultimately, I can pay $15 per month (which at current exchange rates, works out at virtually nothing for UK residents like myself) to play a MMORPG on a stable, well maintained, well admined server, resulting in less stress all around.

The biggest loser if this does happen will probably be the mod scene. This will obviously struggle if deprived of the ability to run unofficial servers.

Re:Finding a balance

[pdboddy]

If you're willing to pay $15 dollars a month to pay for an MMORPG, why not do the same to play a FPS? There are numerous places to rent servers and run game as you see fit. Get together a small group of friends, or form a clan, and a server rental will be a couple of dollars, each, a month.

Re:you can always *gasp* host a game

[gl4ss]

..and the fan made servers run usually what people want to play.

what good are few servers running some maps nobody is willing to play with you?

Re:you can always *gasp* host a game

[DrSkwid]

any idea how much bandwidth you need for running servers ?

I don't think it's gonna be much fun on my 128k upstream

Quite the opposite.

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree with that. I haven't got much experience in terms of online play because even broadband is too laggy for my taste, but from what I saw most servers run on a completely out-of-the-box config. That means all settings are default, maybe fraglimit disabled or something. That can be frustrating if the defaults for a game suck. Descent 3, for example, doesn't allow mouselook in the default setup, which means you cannot aim properly unless you have one of these joysticks that only make sense with about 1% of all games. Because it defaults to off, any server I tried (granted, there weren't many for D3) had it disabled as well.
As I said, I haven't got much experience with online, but there never seemed to be a lack of ootb servers. It's hard to find servers for those really good but low profile mods (as opposed to insanely popular generic mods like Counterstrike and its derivatives), but not for the original game.

On the other hand, it's sometimes hard to find a server that isn't full, empty, listen or highly latent (i.e. high ping). That IS annoying, but happens to any game or mod.

Like anything else on the internet...

[pdboddy]

... if you can't find what you want, you have to create it yourself. If you can't find a "stock" server, then why not create one? Surely you can't be alone in wanting to play stock Half Life, or Quake ]|[, or Battlefield 1942. Get together a few like-minded individuals and rent a server somewhere. A quick google on "game server rental" brings up quite a few places to rent servers. If you have a good, fast connection to the internet, get a second computer and set up a dedicated server. If you aren't willing to host your own server, or pay someone to host one, there are still plenty (thousands) of game servers out there, there are ones that you will find fun.

So True

[FriedTurkey]

I am glad somebody said this. For every good mod there are 20 bad mods. For every CounterStrike and Desert Combat there are 20 that just tweak a few weapons or add a couple of new textures. I think its great that people are spending time developing mods but its frustrating to download a mod and then realize it sucks. Too many games don't label the games on server lists as mods, so the only way to find out is to get the boot. It is sad to say but sometimes the best play is with OTB settings and graphics.

Tribes 2 is the perfect example

[trippcook]

I loved T2 so much, but after a few months of play (and I got into the game a few months after it came out), I could find no unmodded servers. Some mods just altered the way scores were kept and reported, but most did bizarre things with gravity and weapons, the most egregious (and, for some reason, popular) making sniper-rifle-turrets that never failed to get a headshot. Not really sure what the point of that was, but one or two official Sierra (or VU or whoever) servers running the latest patches and nothing else would have kept me playing to this very day!

Attention VU / Sierra / Tribes people --- pay attention when you release Tribes Vengeance!!!

Re:Tribes 2 is the perfect example

[CyberVenom]

I liked Tribes 2. One of the nice things was that the game browser was good at filtering mods, so unlike some other games, you could find exactly what you were looking for. Personally, I played vanilla for a while, but soon became a fan of the shifter mod. (more vehicles, more weapon modes, more classes, and not usually too unbalanced) It was almost like getting a whole new game without having to buy anything. Mods can be fun, but maybe what the online community needs is something more like the UT voting systems where the server can be tailored to the tastes of the users who are currently playing, not always the tastes of the one admin who is only online for an hour every few days. I agree that those admins who really want their own setup can pay for and run their own server, but why waste resources? I see lots of game servers online that are empty and unplayed simply because they are not running what the players currently online feel like playing. Of course if the server admin comes online and his server is running a mod he hates, he can simply override it and play his version, but that's no reason he needs to keep his server running that version when he is gone and it would go unused anyway.

No problem here, just use your server browser.

[Jagasian]

This is easily solved with a server browser that lets you filter servers based on their settings. So you don't just filter for your vanilla gameplay mode, you also filter for the default settings for that gameplay mode. You can also filter based on levels, etc...

I have been playing Quake since 1996. I still play it today using Fuhquake client and a Qizmo proxy / server browser. Qizmo lets you run such heavily filtered searches, and so I get a list of about 5 servers that match exactly what I want: low ping, non-empty, vanilla ktpro deathmatch.

This lets me pop onto a server, get in and get my quick fix of intense fast paced deathmatch. Even though Quake, after 8 years of being modded, has splintered into several common variations, mods, server settings. You have a slew of CTF varients, a slew of Team Fortress varients, a chunk of deathmatch varients, and even vanilla deathmatch with really lame settings (like Nobody's servers with "teamplay 1" so llamas don't kill themselves with splash damage).

However, every skilled deathmatch player knows that ktpro is the standard for competitive Quake deathmatch. All of the other DM varients are for lamers. I am sure Team Fortress has a similar standard.

A weightless argument

[inkless1]

I've read the same argument on Penny Arcade, that mods and mutators ruined Unreal Tournament 2003. Being the author of one of the larger mutator packs for UT2k3, I thought this was a bit suprising.

#1) Mods and mutators are actually fairly hard to proliferate online, they aren't some kind of virus that seeps into servers - they get put on and stay on because the people enjoy playing them. If people didn't enjoy playing them, they wouldn't be there.

#2) If people preferred to play vanilla games, people would run vanilla servers. For those people who prefer to play vanilla games they should run vanilla servers.

#3) If you can't afford renting a server by yourself, find some like minded people and share the cost. Or, just up your broadband and run a very low-end server (most decent connects can run at least 4-6 player games, and yes - those can be fun too with the right players).

#4) If you can't afford a server, don't have any online friends, and are still running off a 56k modem, then, well, tough. Sorry, the internet gaming world isn't a democracy and never has been (you don't think the term Low Ping Bastard came from nowhere did you?).

Now - the part where I do give this complaint sympathy is in -finding- vanilla online games. Here is where UT2004 really shines, giving much better filters for mutators or no mutators or custom maps or no custom maps and comes with a complete voting package right out of the box so that people on your server can choose to play what they want.

(and btw, the reason Quake III is so tweaked is that many people mastered this game years and years ago ... you don't want them playing vanilla Q3 - they'll likely rocket jump your ass out the door ;) )

BF1942- No mods for me

[Mostly Monkey]

I've been playing BF1942 for over a year now. Most of the big problems I've seen with people (Team killing or blowing up a vehicle because you got to it first) have been with the mod versions of the game like Desert Combat and the like. I'm not sure why this is but ever since I started playing on Co-op servers I've rarely had any problems. People just seem to be more mature on the classic version.

Re:you can always *gasp* host a game

[DrSkwid]

there's also this little gem :

http://www.ntlhome.com/legals/userpolicy.html

17. Servers

(iv) Game: If the game in question has a password/IP access restriction option this must be used. Your IP address must not be publicly advertised on Gaming sites etc.

and I just noticed this little fellow which is new

----

In connecting to the Broadband Service, you must only use a PC you own or lease, and you must not attempt to connect your PC to the Broadband Services from outside your home . This includes the use of wireless or non-wireless networking technology to connect your PC or any other PC to your Broadband Services from outside your home (other than your own garden) or the connection of your PC to anyone else's Broadband Services.

----

which is a bitch as I sometimes pull up outside my house and downlaod/upload stuff without going inside my perimeter

good luck to nlt: finding me doing it !

Enemy Territory is the WORST

[Mike Hawk]

I used to love this game but I can hardly play anymore. Every server has their own stupid campaign, even though most are the same. They have a different name so guess what, you have to download it again. The custom maps SUCK. The mods suck. Lately there have been a few that utterly crash clients in certain combinations, even of the same mod. And what do the mods do? Oh, your guy drops his binoculars when he dies. Oh goodie! Medics spew out medpacks when they die, wtf is that? This is one game that I wish we could have left well enough alone. Good luck finding a vanilla server of ET.