Author Topic: Is it true - P2P?? (Read 5392 times)

DarkLight · August 29, 2006, 07:59:34 PM

BAdspot is gonna make the game P2P? :'(

Ad Bot · Advertisement

Saber15 · August 29, 2006, 08:01:14 PM

What. Making it p2p would be a bad decission unless there is about 10x more content. I'm 99% sure its a stupid rumor random idiot like keal put out.

Liquid Snake · August 29, 2006, 08:06:54 PM

EDIT: Wrong Subject.

DarkLight · August 29, 2006, 11:26:33 PM

Quote from: Liquid Snake on August 29, 2006, 08:06:54 PM

No, I heard him say it himself back in around version 18.....He says he wants everything run by players.

D:

Liquid Snake · August 29, 2006, 11:30:27 PM

EDIT: Wrong Subject.

Badspot · August 29, 2006, 11:39:12 PM

1. Ambiguous topic. I changed it for you.

2. The decision to charge money is driven by supply and demand. I am only willing to supply one server for free. When it gets to the point where the server is full and there are people waiting to get on, then demand has exceeded supply and it is time to raise the price.

You would pay for a premium account. If the server was full with regular users, a premium account user would still be able to join and one of the non-paying people would be kicked out to make room. Once there are enough premium members to fill the server, I'll add another server. Basically paying customers get a guaranteed spot and freeloaders have to get by on the leftovers. Also things that use up limited server resources like houses will require a premium account.

This is all theoretical. I'm not working on AoT much these days.

DarkLight · August 29, 2006, 11:47:36 PM

monthly price?

Chabo · August 30, 2006, 08:07:56 AM

Then why dont you increase the server limit?

Wedge · August 30, 2006, 10:43:08 AM

The amount of people on the server is the maximum it can have without slowing down the game or forums too much, or something like that.

#2 · August 30, 2006, 12:22:13 PM

Quote from: Saber15 on August 29, 2006, 08:01:14 PM

What. Making it p2p would be a bad decission unless there is about 10x more content. I'm 99% sure its a stupid rumor random idiot like keal put out.

no for the refrence i dotn play aot anymore

Badspot · August 30, 2006, 04:44:17 PM

Quote from: Chabo on August 30, 2006, 08:07:56 AM

Then why dont you increase the server limit?

Damn why didn't I think of that. While we're at it, why don't we get rid of that short bus you take to school and pack all the handicapped kids onto a motorcycle!

DarkLight · August 30, 2006, 04:49:50 PM

Quote from: Badspot on August 30, 2006, 04:44:17 PM

Quote from: Chabo on August 30, 2006, 08:07:56 AM
Then why dont you increase the server limit?

Damn why didn't I think of that. While we're at it, why don't we get rid of that short bus you take to school and pack all the handicapped kids onto a motorcycle!

lol

Don't forget about the gas prices

Anti-Cop · August 30, 2006, 04:52:50 PM

lol in U.S. History we talked about how the Tea Act made tea in the colonies CHEAPER, but cut into wealthy businessmans profits, so they incited anger.

And the "taxation without representation"... In Boston they were paying 2% what Londoners were paying, and they got ticked off over taxes.

TheSilentNinja · August 31, 2006, 03:56:30 PM

I thnk they just wanted to be independent, NO taxes from the damn Brits, because, what was Britain doing? The Colonies were more or less independent. Ohh, noo, they might cut off our TEA SUPPLY if become independent!!!!!
Wow, i did'nt even know I was a history nerd : P

Badspot · August 31, 2006, 04:25:25 PM

Quote from: Anti-Cop on August 30, 2006, 04:52:50 PM

lol in U.S. History we talked about how the Tea Act made tea in the colonies CHEAPER, but cut into wealthy businessmans profits, so they incited anger.

And the "taxation without representation"... In Boston they were paying 2% what Londoners were paying, and they got ticked off over taxes.

Your summary makes it sound like a bunch of greedy business men brainwashed the public somehow, that's not the case.

The tea act was more a case of government subsidies undercutting the free market. The brittish government allowed the British East India Company to sell tea with no tax, effectively giving it a monopoly on the tea market. American companies were being taxed to death while british companies got a free ride.