Slashdot Mirror


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."

10 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. This is a good thing by obeythefist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    1. Re:This is a good thing by cbirdsong64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:This is a good thing by Grand · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

  2. Atari/Epic are a notable exception by Spiffae · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Atari/Epic are a notable exception by apoc.famine · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.)

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  3. Savage by MegaT · · Score: 4, Informative

    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).

  4. Finding a balance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Finding a balance by pdboddy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      --
      Julie Moult is an idiot.
  5. Tribes 2 is the perfect example by trippcook · · Score: 4, Interesting
    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!!!

  6. A weightless argument by inkless1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 ;) )