No it didn’t, and we still have user servers for some games. Such games typically have a few official servers run by the developer, with tons of community servers with a wide variety of gameplay.
The reason we don’t have them as much anymore is purely corporate greed. It’s the same reason most games don’t have mods, even though they stole their most popular gameplay modes from them.
We did, indeed. This is the entire reason for centralized servers existing. It turns out that trying to find the right server for a death match in Doom on a third party site wasn’t as fun as it sounds.
Sorry but what did “we” specifically move away from? Because user hosted servers are very much still a thing for a lot of games and none of the problems you mentioned are really inherent to the concept. Web technology and integration was just a lot… less mature in the nineties.
Like I said I don’t really share that experience. To my knowledge user hosted servers are still a thing. Your claim lacks supporting evidence. Or even an argument beyond “old games old” really, because user hosted servers don’t equate having to use third-party websites anymore for most games.
The argument I was addressing was “It didn’t suck ass” when it provably did because people went ape shit over Steam and Battle.net giving centralized ways to find games.
Yeah which is my entire point, because both of those examples were ways to find user hosted servers as well as ones hosted by the developers. So your argument doesn’t make sense as a retort to what the initial OP was saying IMHO, which included:
Then, all you really need to run is a simple connection server that lets people search for game servers.
Those are what Steam and Battle.net are in this context, the connection server, which is different from the game server which was meant by “let the users run the servers”.
Those are what Steam and Battle.net are in this context, the connection server, which is different from the game server which was meant by “let the users run the servers”.
This is what I meant by “moved away from”
As you also state, there are currently games with user-run servers. With the exception of Minecraft, they all do less business than games with a centralized server.
There’s a reason for that, and it isn’t some mythical cartel. If there was such a cartel, then there wouldn’t be games that host their own servers.
Any sort of competitive game, as an easy example, will always be more popular if it has a server hosted by the game itself, to make cheating harder. Even GTA’s online play was blasted by players for not having enough security. The rise of fast internet led to demand for more multiplayer, and especially competitive-multiplayer games.
Im old enough to remember reading the debates on “is multiplayer worth companies spending time on” in PC Gamer and other physical magazines, at the time. The original mentality was that multiplayer modes were a waste of time that detracted from game quality by diverting resources, because games were too hard to find anyway.
Idk why people are so desperate to find supervillains everywhere that they refuse to acknowledge how the current system evolved, historically.
Those are what Steam and Battle.net are in this context, the connection server, which is different from the game server which was meant by “let the users run the servers”.
This is what I meant by “moved away from”
Ok, that was really unclear from your OP, hence my question. Thanks for clearing that up.
With the exception of Minecraft, they all do less business than games with a centralized server.
“If you ignore this falsifying date my hypothesis holds” seems like a weird way of arguing, but ok. Minecraft is indeed a popular multiplayer game with user run servers.
Idk why people are so desperate to find supervillains everywhere
I’m not, I just wasn’t clear on whether you were talking about connection servers or game servers, and was ready to break a lance for the latter.
Back in the 90s, no one could afford a good computer that could run a game and serve it’s users.
It’s 30 years later and today, most people have a phone that’s hundreds of times more powerful. Not only that, many people now have dedicated Internet that is, again, hundreds of times faster than what most people who had computers in the 90s.
It’s even easier than ever to stand up a server with docker containers, which was not even possible back then. Virtual systems was still a niche development and was at least a few years away from regular use.
You are right that back then, it sucked ass. But today, it’s more possible than ever.
You are right that back then, it sucked ass. But today, it’s more possible than ever.
Right but this means that it was not, in fact, random acts of greed but rather offering services people want that made the switch happen, which is the topic of discussion here
No, that isn’t what happened. User run servers, particularly dedicated servers hosted by proper hosting companies, got good before they were taken away. Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Counterstrike 1.6, then all the Source games, hell even early EA’s Battlefield and Call of Duty had user servers. Communities formed on these servers along with innovative gameplay modes - I know this first hand running Counterstrike surf servers in the 00’s.
They also had mods. Valve hired the developers of the Counterstrike mod to help make source, and EA hired the developers of the BF1942 mod Desert Combat to make Battlefield 2. Then Activision stole the zombie mod from COD modders and then locked away modding so they could sell maps (which modders had been making for free, with better quality). EA followed suit not long after.
It was around this time that user servers started to be prohibited in new games. It was part of the same greed, with servers it gives the publisher more control - you’ll have to buy the new game to keep playing if they switch the servers off.
User servers being taken away was a business decision, it did not happen because the concept was flawed.
But finding servers, official or community, was never hard in any of the games I listed. Like I say, the game runs a simple server that catalogues them - when you run a server it tells the game server its details, then a player polls the game server for IPs and the player’s client then fetches the details and pings from each server. User servers are exactly the same as official servers in this regard.
The reason gaming grew is simply because more and more people had internet and computers/games consoles, and because young gamers got older such that it became more acceptable for adults to play.
Everything you’ve said hasn’t been true for more than 20 years.
But that’s exactly what you did with COD and user servers.
Honestly, at this point it just sounds like you’re shilling for the publishers. You cannot accept the fact that user owned servers were not taken away for the benefit of the players, but for the benefit of the business.
No it didn’t, and we still have user servers for some games. Such games typically have a few official servers run by the developer, with tons of community servers with a wide variety of gameplay.
The reason we don’t have them as much anymore is purely corporate greed. It’s the same reason most games don’t have mods, even though they stole their most popular gameplay modes from them.
We did, indeed. This is the entire reason for centralized servers existing. It turns out that trying to find the right server for a death match in Doom on a third party site wasn’t as fun as it sounds.
Sorry but what did “we” specifically move away from? Because user hosted servers are very much still a thing for a lot of games and none of the problems you mentioned are really inherent to the concept. Web technology and integration was just a lot… less mature in the nineties.
People who were alive at the time and flocked to centralized servers. Markets respond to demand.
Like I said I don’t really share that experience. To my knowledge user hosted servers are still a thing. Your claim lacks supporting evidence. Or even an argument beyond “old games old” really, because user hosted servers don’t equate having to use third-party websites anymore for most games.
The argument I was addressing was “It didn’t suck ass” when it provably did because people went ape shit over Steam and Battle.net giving centralized ways to find games.
Yeah which is my entire point, because both of those examples were ways to find user hosted servers as well as ones hosted by the developers. So your argument doesn’t make sense as a retort to what the initial OP was saying IMHO, which included:
Those are what Steam and Battle.net are in this context, the connection server, which is different from the game server which was meant by “let the users run the servers”.
This is what I meant by “moved away from”
As you also state, there are currently games with user-run servers. With the exception of Minecraft, they all do less business than games with a centralized server.
There’s a reason for that, and it isn’t some mythical cartel. If there was such a cartel, then there wouldn’t be games that host their own servers.
Any sort of competitive game, as an easy example, will always be more popular if it has a server hosted by the game itself, to make cheating harder. Even GTA’s online play was blasted by players for not having enough security. The rise of fast internet led to demand for more multiplayer, and especially competitive-multiplayer games.
Im old enough to remember reading the debates on “is multiplayer worth companies spending time on” in PC Gamer and other physical magazines, at the time. The original mentality was that multiplayer modes were a waste of time that detracted from game quality by diverting resources, because games were too hard to find anyway.
Idk why people are so desperate to find supervillains everywhere that they refuse to acknowledge how the current system evolved, historically.
Ok, that was really unclear from your OP, hence my question. Thanks for clearing that up.
“If you ignore this falsifying date my hypothesis holds” seems like a weird way of arguing, but ok. Minecraft is indeed a popular multiplayer game with user run servers.
I’m not, I just wasn’t clear on whether you were talking about connection servers or game servers, and was ready to break a lance for the latter.
Back in the 90s, no one could afford a good computer that could run a game and serve it’s users.
It’s 30 years later and today, most people have a phone that’s hundreds of times more powerful. Not only that, many people now have dedicated Internet that is, again, hundreds of times faster than what most people who had computers in the 90s.
It’s even easier than ever to stand up a server with docker containers, which was not even possible back then. Virtual systems was still a niche development and was at least a few years away from regular use.
You are right that back then, it sucked ass. But today, it’s more possible than ever.
Right but this means that it was not, in fact, random acts of greed but rather offering services people want that made the switch happen, which is the topic of discussion here
No, that isn’t what happened. User run servers, particularly dedicated servers hosted by proper hosting companies, got good before they were taken away. Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Counterstrike 1.6, then all the Source games, hell even early EA’s Battlefield and Call of Duty had user servers. Communities formed on these servers along with innovative gameplay modes - I know this first hand running Counterstrike surf servers in the 00’s.
They also had mods. Valve hired the developers of the Counterstrike mod to help make source, and EA hired the developers of the BF1942 mod Desert Combat to make Battlefield 2. Then Activision stole the zombie mod from COD modders and then locked away modding so they could sell maps (which modders had been making for free, with better quality). EA followed suit not long after.
It was around this time that user servers started to be prohibited in new games. It was part of the same greed, with servers it gives the publisher more control - you’ll have to buy the new game to keep playing if they switch the servers off.
User servers being taken away was a business decision, it did not happen because the concept was flawed.
I love how you talk about all these games with private servers, but not user numbers, because it cuts to the heart of this discussion immediately.
The reason the gaming community grew exponentially is that gaming was made significantly easier, especially PC gaming.
I understand you don’t like the change and pine for the old days, but we aren’t discussing things we like, were discussing events that happened
deleted by creator
But finding servers, official or community, was never hard in any of the games I listed. Like I say, the game runs a simple server that catalogues them - when you run a server it tells the game server its details, then a player polls the game server for IPs and the player’s client then fetches the details and pings from each server. User servers are exactly the same as official servers in this regard.
The reason gaming grew is simply because more and more people had internet and computers/games consoles, and because young gamers got older such that it became more acceptable for adults to play.
Everything you’ve said hasn’t been true for more than 20 years.
You’re not the mainstream person who wants to play FIFA, Madden, and COD and just pick the fucking thing up and hit “play game”
We are literally talking about the past.
deleted by creator
But that’s exactly what you did with COD and user servers.
Honestly, at this point it just sounds like you’re shilling for the publishers. You cannot accept the fact that user owned servers were not taken away for the benefit of the players, but for the benefit of the business.