Dedicated Servers or Dedicated Server Access for Subscription/Platinum

[Vexzt]

Ultimately, this post was written in hopes that we could get access to dedicated servers. This is because getting constant host migration or being connected to a host with a poor connection results in a nigh-unplayable and horrible experience. I fully realize that servers cost money and maintenance takes human resources and money to maintain. This is why my proposal has what I feel is a solution that alleviates that problem. 

I would like to suggest an option for players to pay a subscription (with $ or platinum) for access to dedicated servers. In order to prevent this from dividing the community, it should be implemented in such a way that any player that has paid for dedicated server access and matches to a group would pull the group to the dedicated server with him. If he leaves after the group begins connecting to the dedicated server, they will continue connecting to the dedicated server and remain connected to it even if that sole dedicated server access patron leaves at any point. This prevents anybody from suffering from not opting to pay for dedicated server access and allows some players to occasionally benefit even without paying. The only concern on DE's side would be the cost of implementing such a setup and would require enough players that were willing to pay for the dedicated server access to make it profitable. Personally, I would be more than happy to pay a $15/mo (or less) subscription (or a platinum equivalent) as an option to have access to dedicated servers so that I could say goodbye to host migration loading screens and the related forever loading screens and bugs/glitches/crashes that occasionally come after host migration during a mission. 

I feel this implementation would improve the overall experience of the game since reliability is a major factor in determining game quality. At times, I'm sure many people have said "I've had it with the constant host migration!" and either thought about quitting the game or actually did. 

If dedicated servers are just not in the cards, however, I did have a secondary option or that could be implemented in conjunction with the initial suggestion. That option being a means to volunteer as host as an advanced (not default) setting so that players that have solid systems and good connections can volunteer so that they are more likely to end up being the host instead of connecting to a host. Also a second option to ONLY be the host and not match with anyone that also has the same setting enabled as only one person can be host. This would obviously potentially reduce or eliminate any capability of matchmaking, but it could be an option that ensures that the players that are just tired of playing the game if they have to see one more host migration screen would have a solution that hurts nobody. Obviously, if anybody was noticing undesirable results when matchmaking, they could always opt to volunteer as host so they didn't restrict matching with others that had the host only setting enabled. Additionally, you could datamine the quantity of players that enabled that setting to determine how many players are really tired of host migration. 

[Koldraxon-732]

You didn't know about the Fan-hosted Conclave Dedicated Servers, I believe? DE just has to figure out how to make them host non-Conclave squads.

[LucielaFox]

58 minutes ago, Vexzt said:

This is because getting constant host migration or being connected to a host with a poor connection results in a nigh-unplayable and horrible experience.

Then play solo

This game has been just fine without those servers for 5 years. I can give you an example with the host migration problem out of my own experience. I usually cause them for my friend but the issue was always because my video card was very low on RAM (this game needs about 250MB while I had just 35MB. There is a significant difference.) and it has nothing to do with "unstable servers" like you are implying with this post. I also notice you missed the point of "Free to Play" RPG that Warframe is. Which, for your information, this premium membership idea would ruin it. Their whole slogan is that you can play without spending a dime in this game, while it is an option. And do you know how many people will want to be on those servers? This could be exploited to the highest bidder.

Plus, host migration can be caused by the host purposely leaving the group... AKA Trolls.

In any case, this idea is bad.

Edited July 3, 2018 by LucielaFox

[Vexzt]

4 minutes ago, Koldraxon-732 said:

You didn't know about the Fan-hosted Conclave Dedicated Servers, I believe? DE just has to figure out how to make them host non-Conclave squads.

I knew about that, but that was limited to Conclave, so I didn't mention that in the post. When I first saw the option in settings when optimizing download cache, I saw dedicated server and thought it was an option to make yourself a dedicated server for the whole game, but then did research and realized it was only for Conclave and got disappointed. 

[Vexzt]

57 minutes ago, LucielaFox said:

Then play solo

This game has been just fine without those servers for 5 years. I can give you an example with the host migration problem out of my own experience. I usually cause them for my friend but the issue was always because my video card was very low on RAM (this game needs about 250MB while I had just 35MB. There is a significant difference.) and it has nothing to do with "unstable servers" like you are implying with this post. I also notice you missed the point of "Free to Play" RPG that Warframe is. Which, for your information, this premium membership idea would ruin it. Their whole slogan is that you can play without spending a dime in this game, while it is an option. And do you know how many people will want to be on those servers? This could be exploited to the highest bidder.

Plus, host migration can be caused by the host purposely leaving the group... AKA Trolls.

In any case, this idea is bad.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To your first comment... I feel it's kind of small-minded for you to suggest soloing. If I wanted to only play by myself, sure. You might consider that I probably also wouldn't have made this proposal if that was a viable solution. I'm also not just concerned about my own experience, but that of others. I enjoy multi-player games, but I don't enjoy the multi-player issues that often come along for the ride. I also firmly believe that every problem has one or more viable solutions. If you can't first establish a problem then you never start looking for a solution. This proposal was made after I established that there was a problem with recurring host migrations (and I don't care about your explanations as to why they occur). Regardless of what white knight excuses you make for host migration, it's a nuisance. It is especially problematic when host migration brings forever loading screens and host crashes that result in a try again next time. I mean, most missions aren't so difficult that you can't repeat them. That doesn't mean that it's acceptable to ignore the problem, however. 

This idea isn't bad. I have explained every perceived angle of the proposal in such a way as to alleviate any and all negative aspects. The whole point is there is no downside to the proposal. The only question is if it is viable for DE to implement. This being related to the number of players willing to subscribe for dedicated server access.

Many multi-player games have dedicated servers and for obvious reasons. Many people have asked for dedicated servers. However, the cost of dedicated servers may change the financial game model and a forced dedicated servers only change may hurt the game because the money has to come from somewhere. Since Warframe is absolutely free in both initial cost and over time, the only tangible income is from microtransactions (which are also totally optional). This is why I suggested an option to pay for it so that the cost of the servers doesn't have to come entirely out of the profits from microtransactions as the game has no reliable source of income because it's totally free. It's honestly the only way to get dedicated servers without forcing everyone to pay for something. That is, unless the microtransaction sales were sufficient to not only pay for the cost of the servers, but also ensure the maintenance costs would always be covered. That seems unwise because microtransactions are completely optional. However, I don't see DE doing it just with microtransaction profits because (as I understand it) that is currently their sole source of income from Warframe. 

My suggestion hurts no one and benefits any player that is willing to pay and even some players that don't want to pay. 

The only reason it may not be implemented is if DE didn't think there weren't enough players that were willing to pay to cover the cost of the server hardware and setup costs or the continual cost of server maintenance over the long term. 

Also, your claim that the game has been just fine for 5 years is a backward way of thinking. I hadn't been playing for a week when I heard a player comment that "this is Bugframe, after all." Of course, I had already experienced my own share of host migration spam.

Yes, I realize that if the host leaves it would force host migration. I'm not concerned with how and why host migration occurs, but that it can be avoided. It shouldn't be considered trolling if somebody leaves a group because it shouldn't have to host migrate in the first place. That is why I suggested dedicated servers. That would remedy ever having to host migrate.

I never said anything about "unstable servers" and don't appreciate you changing my words. Hosts that have either a poor system or a poor connection (or both) can cause a poor connection for those players connecting to that host. This results in rubberbanding and possible host migration. This is the whole point of my post. I am proposing a solution that at least alleviates host migration for those willing to pay for dedicated server access and it brings along with it the benefit of possibly pulling some players that would not pay for dedicated server access. I don't honestly care about you white knighting people without enough RAM, etc. 

Additionally, the game is free to play and would remain free to play with my proposal in place. There are already things you can optionally pay for (ie, platinum). You seem to have missed that free to play titles are allowed to have optional fees for cosmetics, features, access, etc. I also never called this "premium membership." Don't change my words. It implies what you are pushing and not what I intended when I composed my proposal. 

Not considering ways to improve is how you eventually fall behind or fall apart. Haven't you ever watched the Toyota commercial? The TL;DR version of the commercial was that if you want to stay #1, you can't stay the same, you must always improve. Any business model always considers future change in some aspects. This is especially true when you're talking about dedicated servers. Dedicated servers are very common in popular and successful multi-player titles because they have so many performance, security, and reliability advantages. The only downside to dedicated servers is the cost of initial setup and the continuous maintenance to keep them running smoothly. The upside is the security and reliability. Most of the game titles that have hacking issues have the majority of their issues because it's much easier to introduce malicious code into player-hosted server environments than dedicated servers that have improved firewalls, intrusion-detection capabilities, and restricted access. Many first/third-person shooters have lost their player base because of excessive hacking that completely ruined the game. 

I would point out that the most logical reason we don't already have dedicated servers is because DE didn't want players to have to pay anything out of pocket to enjoy the game. Another reason something like my proposal hasn't been introduced yet is because the game had to mature before such a proposal would be viable. Now that the game has been out for years and is only growing, it is a rational time to consider dedicated servers and any and all options that would allow the experience. This is why I think my proposal is a really good option for DE and the Warframe community. My proposal doesn't disturb the free to play model and it doesn't require DE to cover the cost of the dedicated servers or the continual maintenance costs if a sufficient portion of the player base is willing to pay a subscription for dedicated server access. 

Your point earlier is that the game is totally free to play and I completely understood that when I made this proposal because it addresses a possible solution that allows the game to remain free to play while still allowing the option of paying for dedicated server access. I even proposed it in such a way that it wouldn't harm or divide the player community by restricting free to play from grouping with dedicated subscribers. The dedicated subscribers would actually benefit the non-subscribers whenever the matchmaking tool put them together because the dedicated server subscribers would pull the whole group with them to the dedicated server.

Yes, I fully realize that I have repeated my logic many times in both this post and the original post, but it seems I wasn't clear enough based on your response. It's not even a question of whether my proposal is an improvement. It's obvious that dedicated servers are more favorable than host servers, but the main reason for proposing the idea is to give DE an idea of a way that they can introduce dedicated servers without incurring any costs to the player. I thought it was something they may not have considered and I really think it would work or I wouldn't have suggested it in the first place. This is because I have never known of a game that had optional dedicated servers for a subscription before, but I can't see any logical reason why it wouldn't work for Warframe. If you're so convinced the game is fine without them, then you would suffer not a bit to simply not subscribe and continue as is. But for many others that are willing to pay for quality and reliability, it wouldn't hurt you to let them. Just like it doesn't hurt you if somebody wants to buy platinum. 

Edited July 3, 2018 by Vexzt

[LucielaFox]

5 minutes ago, Vexzt said:

I'm not concerned with how and why host migration occurs,

You should be, seeing that you want stable servers for host migration problem. Which won't be entirely fixed with the premium membership servers. Cause servers, aren't always the damn problem. It can be internet connection of the host, the computer specs of the host, and trolls.

7 minutes ago, Vexzt said:

the only tangible income is from microtransactions (which are also totally optional). This is why I suggested an option to pay for it so that the cost of the servers doesn't have to come entirely out of the profits from microtransactions

Still defeats the whole purpose of a Free to Play game. Do you want Warframe to be like Final Fantasy XIV Online? Cause it will be a close match.

11 minutes ago, Vexzt said:

it shouldn't have to host migrate in the first place.

Ever consider that this is how the game is made though.

--------------------------------

I could quote you all day but I will just skip that and go straight to the point. Because I have a life instead of writing walls of texts trying to prove why spending money on another subscription (which is premium membership its just that you are trying to say its not), which will be at best 10euros (or $ for you muricans) will benefit everyone. Because hosts, cost a lot of money. While yes I do see your point, its the fact that you want people to pay is what I dont like. You missed my point that

1 hour ago, LucielaFox said:

do you know how many people will want to be on those servers? This could be exploited to the highest bidder.

Why can't you just go - Hey DE, why don't you go and get yourself better servers overall or something, dedicated servers at that. And replace the older ones. Of course yes you did talk about this and why it wouldn't work in a way. Its where the pointless monthly subscriptions came in to place. Its not like we know if DE ever thought about this. Maybe for this whole idea they don't do this. That they wouldn't force people to play for a future that not everyone will use. Because not everyone is getting the issue of host migration. Which, again, is not only caused by servers for gods sakes.
 

[Vexzt]

57 minutes ago, LucielaFox said:

You should be, seeing that you want stable servers for host migration problem. Which won't be entirely fixed with the premium membership servers. Cause servers, aren't always the damn problem. It can be internet connection of the host, the computer specs of the host, and trolls.

I'm not sure you understand what you're talking about.

I never asked for stable servers.

I also never referred to my proposal as premium membership servers. I proposed the option to pay a subscription for dedicated server access. Don't change my words, please. You make it sound like something else entirely. The game would remain as free to play as it currently is. It would simply have an option that would neither divide players, nor would it require anybody to do anything differently or suffer any consequences if they didn't. In fact, my proposal would even give non-subscribers for the dedicated server access the benefit of sometimes being grouped with somebody in matchmaking that was a subscriber that would allow them to go to the dedicated server for that mission with absolutely no cost or downside. 

Again, you say servers aren't the problem but you obviously haven't grasped that the servers are the players. One player in every mission is a host. The host server. The host that can leave the group and trigger host migration. I also mentioned that it didn't make any difference why host migration was being triggered. The fact that it can and does happen (and far too often) is the issue and the reason I proposed dedicated servers in the first place. I had to propose it as an option because this game is a free to play with no initial cost and no subscription which makes it... you guessed it... just like I already said... free to play... so that means that there has to be a source of the currency from the game that supports the cost of initial setup and continuous maintenance to keep the dedicated servers running smoothly. Since the game is free to play, the only source of profit is through microtransactions, but those aren't reliable because they are completely on the whim of the players. Dedicated servers, beyond the initial setup cost of the hardware and labor to install, requires regular maintenance which requires human resources as well as monetary to keep them running smoothly. So... that means that the players would have to support the cost at least in some form. So... my suggestion was to have it be an optional subscription for access because then only the players that want to ensure quality connection have to pay. The rest of the player base can keep playing with host servers and it won't change for them. They may even occasionally get on a dedicated server because somebody else in matchmaking has access.

So please, let the adults review this and keep your misunderstanding to yourself or at least ask questions before assuming you understand what somebody is even talking about.

That is why I am suggesting a very viable option for dedicated server access that hurts NO ONE and benefits those that are willing to pay and anybody that they group with in matchmaking or by manual invite because they obviously would need to play on the same server, whether dedicated or not and why not allow the whole group to play on the dedicated server when it's being run regardless because the subscriber would default to it. Also, I stressed the importance of having matchmaking allow subscribers to populate the same pool as non-subscribers so it wouldn't divide the player base and deprive the non-subscribers of the subscribers in the matchmaking pool. This is how it hurts NO ONE. The only reason it may not be implemented is if DE doesn't perceive the cost of implementing the dedicated servers because of the cost and continuous maintenance that comes along with having dedicated servers. This is a suggestion for DE, not really for players to chime in on unless in support. This is because there is absolutely no downside to ANYBODY and that makes it something you can either support or remain silent about. There's no reason to argue against it unless you're one of those people that thinks there's no need for a cure to cancer because it's just fine the way it is...

You can't ask everyone that plays Warframe to be a stable host.

That is why dedicated servers are a great option and the manner in which I proposed it would allow the game to remain free to play and offer the option of having a stable dedicated server instead of having host (maybe you don't realize what host servers means, so I'll explain that it means a player in every group is the host server) migration issues all the time.

If you had dedicated servers... there wouldn't be host migration because everyone would be connecting to a dedicated server... not another host... no trolls could trigger host migration because nobody would be connected to the troll host because he wouldn't be a host because everyone (including the troll) would be connected to the dedicated server... a dedicated server that wouldn't leave the group because the server isn't a player... I feel like you don't understand what you're talking about and you're really confusing the issue with baseless points. 

[Vexzt]

1 hour ago, LucielaFox said:

Ever consider that this is how the game is made though.

--------------------------------

I could quote you all day but I will just skip that and go straight to the point. Because I have a life instead of writing walls of texts trying to prove why spending money on another subscription (which is premium membership its just that you are trying to say its not), which will be at best 10euros (or $ for you muricans) will benefit everyone. Because hosts, cost a lot of money. While yes I do see your point, its the fact that you want people to pay is what I dont like. You missed my point that

Why can't you just go - Hey DE, why don't you go and get yourself better servers overall or something, dedicated servers at that. And replace the older ones. Of course yes you did talk about this and why it wouldn't work in a way. Its where the pointless monthly subscriptions came in to place. Its not like we know if DE ever thought about this. Maybe for this whole idea they don't do this. That they wouldn't force people to play for a future that not everyone will use. Because not everyone is getting the issue of host migration. Which, again, is not only caused by servers for gods sakes.
 

You really don't understand much and it's embarrassing reading your comments and the only reason I entertain your ignorance is because you may mislead or confuse somebody else with your ridiculous perspective. 

Your quotes are completely taken out of perspective and reveal your ignorance of host and dedicated servers. 

You are putting words in my mouth, so to speak, and you are twisting my proposal to how you think I'm proposing it. I have been very clear in my explanation of how I propose it would work and made sure to emphasize that it wouldn't affect the free to play in any way, shape, or form. It would not negatively affect anyone that did or did not elect to pay and the only reason it would be an option to pay is because this is real life and stuff costs money. SOMEBODY has to pay and I am saying that I, personally, would not mind. I embrace paying for it because I believe the quality would be worth the investment and continued patronage. 

You suggesting that I just ask DE to get better servers... illustrates that you don't understand anything about host servers because the reason host migration occurs is more related to player computers because THEY are the hosts. DE doesn't have dedicated servers for Warframe public. Please grasp that before you make further comments about servers. I would never ask DE to get better servers because the servers are the players' computers! You say that hosts cost a lot of money... No. No, just no. What players paid for their computers that they are hosting Warframe on is irrelevant. How many times do I have to explain that host servers means players are using their personal computers (PCs) as host servers when they group in Warframe. One person in every group MUST be the host server because Warframe does NOT HAVE DEDICATED SERVERS! 

The one person that seems abundantly ignorant and not "getting the issue of host migration" is you! I'll say it again. Warframe does NOT HAVE DEDICATED SERVERS! I'm proposing dedicated servers and I'm volunteering to be a subscriber to pay money (or platinum) for access to said dedicated servers because I don't mind paying for reliability and to be able to say goodbye to host migration. I feel that at least some other players feel the same and whether or not the proposal is viable in the eyes of DE is not part of my proposal. That will be related to whether or not they can implement it because dedicated servers cost money.

I realize that DE was able to make this game work with host servers because that removed one physical component from the cost of startup and continuous maintenance. Very little in life is free. Warframe wouldn't exist without microtransactions, either. Those exist. Those aren't free. Those ARE optional, however. My proposal ALSO would be optional. Please comprehend that. 

The game was made how it is now with players being the host servers because this removes the cost of purchasing and installing and maintaining dedicated servers. This allows the game to use the players' computers as host servers. 

This is because this isn't a big name title. People thought this game would fail. Others later made a video saying that everyone said this game would fail, but they were obviously wrong. They took a little common sense and made a game completely free to play with lots of cosmetic options and game content that costs nothing at all. Not even the initial download and install of the game. The only cost is the optional microtransactions. This is fine because the game is not pay to win, it's free to play. You can totally enjoy the game without spending a penny. That being said, there are options to pay money for cosmetic and convenience that has no real impact on the game. 

Because Warframe has no initial cost or required subscription and is totally free to play... it wouldn't be able to support dedicated servers without some sort of option simply because that would take right out of their profits. To put yourself in DE's shoes, it would be like taking part of your profit and putting it back into the game. This isn't an irrational concept, mind you, but it's not something you should really ever expect a game to do because it's ultimately designed to make money. At least, a small profit so it doesn't lose money. So, you see... my suggestion is a very valid and viable proposal that I simply wanted to get DE's attention on to consider. I didn't want or need any player comments. This is meant for DE because this is where you post suggestions to DE. I know because I read the FAQ and clicked the link for where to post suggestions. It said appropriate forum, so since this topic doesn't really fit into any of the other topics that I saw, I put it in General. 

Now, I would absolutely appreciate any positive comments because that would only facilitate support for dedicated servers, which would ultimately improve the quality and reliability of the game. This is something that hurts absolutely NO ONE. That being said, NO ONE should feel any reason at all to discourage or discount or invalidate this proposal. It would be totally optional and totally non-detrimental even to those players that DO NOT elect to subscribe to dedicated server access. I emphasized specifically that I would NOT want to propose this dedicated servers option if it would negatively affect anyone that does NOT pay because I don't want ANYONE to feel like they HAVE/NEED to pay because I don't want to ruin the spirit of free to play for anyone. I can't stress that enough!

[Agent-WK]

Well...I guess that it's a good thing that DE doesn't read that much forum feedback..

[RedLila]

DE has mentioned looking into dedicated servers several times and cost has always been the factor (they've always said they'd be willing to do the infrastructure work to migrate to that model). However, the problem with a subscription for access model is that it splits the player base. Suddenly you have "Premium" players who are always on dedicated servers seperated from Free players who always have co-op hosting and never shall the two play together again. Because if you allow for "hangers on" who get the benefit of dedicated servers when grouped with a Premium user now you've created the opportunity for up to 4x your subscribers base on the dedicated servers at any given time. I'm afraid dedicated servers are an all or nothing prospect and money spent on servers is money not being paid to the developers working on new frames, weapons, tiles, etc.

[Shalath]

If you invite others into your squad doesn't that generally make you the host?

[NeithanDiniem]

9 minutes ago, Shalath said:

If you invite others into your squad doesn't that generally make you the host?

Not from outside the mission. The game will rebalance who the host is on mission load, trying and generally succeeding on picking the best host for the most team members. If you invite from within the mission you can force it, but then you might be forcing a worse connection for more players.

Edited July 3, 2018 by NeithanDiniem