Petition to bring back the old playerworld system

[Inverness]

I believe the current system of renting playerworlds is choking the life out of Graal. There are so many playerworlds around now that there are simply not enough developers per playerworld to get any work done.

I believe Zodiac is the only classic playerworld to come out of the new playerworld system and go somewhere. I dunno why Zodiac is the exception but the number of successes since this system was introduced versus the number of successes before it should be a big clue-in about how well its working.

Nowadays almost everyone who thinks they have a good idea and wants to put time into something goes out and rents their own server instead of contributing to an existing one. And even if this person wants to contribute to an existing one, there are so many servers and so little good ones that their efforts go to waste.

The hosted tab seems to have little long term benefit as, again, Zodiac is the only server that I know of that has gone classic.

The best possible thing that can be done in the short term to try to save Graal would be to roll back to the old playerworld system so staff can be concentrated into a fewer number of servers so they all have a better chance of making it somewhere.

Edit: Most importantly people should not need to pay for a gold account to be able to work on these playerworlds.

Edit 2: WhiteDragon suggested I detail what the "old playerworld system" is, so here we go.

Basically, instead of people renting servers on their own and trying in vain to gather a good development team that can get things done in any reasonable amount of time, it would be required to already have a decent amount of content established beforehand before you could request a free server (evaluation required) to bring your content online and kick things into next gear. Of course in the generation of GS2, you can not really do that kind of stuff offline anymore, so a server like Testbed would be required to allow budding projects to develop to the point where they could obtain their own server. Basically this means that any under construction servers are already guaranteed to have a good amount of content--the foundation--in place. Developers interested in contributing could know that the server they're working on has already passed one level of evaluation and is most likely going somewhere.

[KrimsonSky]

Where do I sign :o

[Immolate]

I agree.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Inverness

I dunno why Zodiac is the exception

Because it filled in a gap that was left open by the then decaying Maloria.

[maximus_asinus]

signed

[Soala]

I definitively support this. I kind of forgot how the old playerworld system was since I never participated in it but still heard of it. Don't know if it would be a huge success, but hell it would sure bring worlds with a minimum quality in them.

*signs*

[fowlplay4]

Can't make money off the old way which is why they'll never go back to it, but I do agree that developers shouldn't have to pay for a gold sub.

It would be more realistic to have developer slots on servers, so they can have X amount of people work on the server for free.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by fowlplay4

Can't make money off the old way

Entirely false. More quality content would attract more people to Graal.

This is one of those risks you have to take in business, Stefan can either continue the current trend with Graal slowly dieing or take a risk that will most likely pay off in the end.

[Crow]

I agree. Nice idea indeed.

[LoneAngelIbesu]

Originally Posted by Inverness

Of course in the generation of GS2, you can not really do that kind of stuff offline anymore, so a server like Testbed would be required to allow budding projects to develop to the point where they could obtain their own server.

Having multiple playerworlds on a single server. Isn't that kind of a bad idea? How would you segment the server? How would you control CPU usage, lag, etc?

[cbk1994]

Most of the servers rented are rented by people who have no idea how to develop. Most of the good developers tend to be working on successful servers or working on projects that may actually work out. Unfortunately, there are also projects by these good developers that fail due to lack of help, but if you remove the option to rent playerworlds, you'll just force people off.

I know I wouldn't stick around long if I couldn't keep developing just for the sake of it. I like being able to start my own server, even if it won't go far.

However I agree fully with not requiring gold to develop.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

Most of the servers rented are rented by people who have no idea how to develop. Most of the good developers tend to be working on successful servers or working on projects that may actually work out. Unfortunately, there are also projects by these good developers that fail due to lack of help, but if you remove the option to rent playerworlds, you'll just force people off.

I know I wouldn't stick around long if I couldn't keep developing just for the sake of it. I like being able to start my own server, even if it won't go far.

However I agree fully with not requiring gold to develop.

If you remove the option to rent players developers will have to go to an existing playerworld if they want to contribute instead of attempting to work on a brand new project that will not get sufficient help to evolve beyond a waste of time and money.

I would think people would be more willing to develop if there weren't so many failed playerworlds.

I also wouldn't want you starting your own server if it takes away developers that could be working on other servers. Unless, however, you have a good idea and are confident about putting in the time and effort to make it to the classic tab. Managing a server and not being confident about its success is a road to disaster.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Inverness

If you remove the option to rent players developers will have to go to an existing playerworld if they want to contribute instead of attempting to work on a brand new project that will not get sufficient help to evolve beyond a waste of time and money.

I would think people would be more willing to develop if there weren't so many failed playerworlds.

I also wouldn't want you starting your own server if it takes away developers that could be working on other servers. Unless, however, you have a good idea and are confident about putting in the time and effort to make it to the classic tab. Managing a server and not being confident about its success is a road to disaster.

I don't see how telling developers they cannot rent their own server and must work on an existing project, thereby forcing some to leave, is going to help Graal.

[Inverness]

Originally Posted by cbk1994

I don't see how telling developers they cannot rent their own server and must work on an existing project, thereby forcing some to leave, is going to help Graal.

If their project is that awesome, important, and unique, then then they would need to work on enough content to earn a server, just as it was done in the old system.

Additionally, look at the classic tab. Everything there except Zodiac was produced under the old system, that should tell you enough about the success of each in bringing new playerworlds to Graal.

[cbk1994]

Originally Posted by Inverness

If their project is that awesome, important, and unique, then then they would need to work on enough content to earn a server, just as it was done in the old system.

Additionally, look at the classic tab. Everything there except Zodiac was produced under the old system, that should tell you enough about the success of each in bringing new playerworlds to Graal.

And what if the developers just want to play around with scripts and make something cool?