Collin201
|
  |
| Joined: 27 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 12394 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:05 PM |
Lots of us heard about this being tested a while back, but, what ever happened to the idea? The idea has gone dead for several months now, and a lot of people, including me, thought this was a good idea.
[=--=]Problem & Solution
-Problem 1: A spammed chat box. Solution: Make a bigger chat box, use bubble chat, and/or a more inventive solution- giving a button or feature of some sort that allows players to view chats from the past. They would not be able to view chats from before they joined. Only chats from the time they joined the server, to the present time. With this, when viewing an old chat from the server, it could be in a separate Gui from the chat Gui, and therefore it wouldn't disappear- so you can take the time to read it.
-Problem 2: Lag. Solution: Only allow games with a low amount of parts use one-hundred player servers, as in, a maximum amount of parts for a one-hundred player server game place.
Solution #2: There could be some type of test or survey, in which players of the game could tell how laggy the game is. If, say, 80% or more people don't lag AT ALL, there, although it has a massive amount of bricks, it could still become a one-hundred player server. This could be an add-on to solution #1, shown above.
-Problem 3: No more small server-games. Solution: Problem 2's solutions could do something with this. A problem would be that everyone uses these servers instead of small servers. Like said in problem 2 solutions, it could be in small, simple games only.
-Problem 4: Crowding. Crowding could ruin a game, especially in combat-games. Sword-fighting, especially.
Solution: A minimum of a baseplate, let's say, 500 studs in diameter, is required for a one-hundred player server. This prevents the game from being too small, for so many people.
[=--=]Benefits
This would benefit the Clans, Guilds, and Groups world. Many war groups' raids could have more attendees in the main server, and meetings within non-war groups could have more people to come, therefore more opinions & ideas.
Less servers per game. This benefits in, filtering through servers of a game, trying to find a friend, non "Slow game" server, or finding a server with less people in it. (Yes, I know about the follow feature, yes, I know that the small servers go in last.)
[=--=] Requirements
Some requirements can be said in the problem & solution section of this forum thread.
I think that one-hundred player servers should be for OBC users only, and should cost maybe 500, or one thousand ROBUX. This would also prevent too much usage.
[=--=]Epilogue
What are your opinions on this? I'd really like this idea.
It'd help a lot of people. -C201
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Collin201
|
  |
| Joined: 27 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 12394 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:05 PM |
Don't be TL;DR, please.
-C201 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Collin201
|
  |
| Joined: 27 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 12394 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:10 PM |
This is a repost of my original thread. Just to solve out some issues that users posted on my original thread, I made a Problem & Solution section.
-C201 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
wddd89
|
  |
| Joined: 10 Sep 2010 |
| Total Posts: 814 |
|
| |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:19 PM |
If lag and crowding is a problem, then it's the creator's problem to solve. There should not be requirements to "solve" these problems.
Dump a bump. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
mrmrluaa3
|
  |
| Joined: 25 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 122 |
|
| |
|
Collin201
|
  |
| Joined: 27 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 12394 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:26 PM |
@Shark, I practically said, the creator must solve the problem.
In the article, it states that the creator must have a large map, and/or a non-laggy game.
-C201 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
TheDenZan
|
  |
| Joined: 27 Jul 2013 |
| Total Posts: 92 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:33 PM |
nope.avi
I don't like your idea. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Fruzik
|
  |
| Joined: 22 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 113 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:44 PM |
| Sharkie stop telling people to dump a bump why dont you |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
robocu3
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Mar 2009 |
| Total Posts: 6485 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:45 PM |
Fruzik, it's a siggy... lol -=Robo=- |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:54 PM |
If they were real requirements all I can imagine seeing is people raging because what they're trying to make requires more bricks, or a different shaped baseplate.
Dump a bump. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
tushie24
|
  |
| Joined: 19 Dec 2009 |
| Total Posts: 14000 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:56 PM |
| It's called changing your place to a mega place. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 01:57 PM |
| support but worry about your group |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 02:08 PM |
Nope. TL:DR and why would you want 100 players? People won't be able to get in with horrible computers.. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 02:15 PM |
Horrible computers- Computer EXPLOSION. No support.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Collin201
|
  |
| Joined: 27 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 12394 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 06:52 PM |
Okay- to fix the computer issue, then it could have some sort of feature that says "Recommended for fast computer only" or something, just to inform the players with slow computers.
If this happened, game creators could make a version of 100 players, and a version of normal amount.
-C201 |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
NineNyan9
|
  |
| Joined: 09 Jul 2012 |
| Total Posts: 24615 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 06:55 PM |
| is it just me or are the only supports clanners and guilders |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
cycoboy83
|
  |
| Joined: 31 May 2011 |
| Total Posts: 831 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 07:12 PM |
| I support. As for people with horrible computers: Invest in something that isn't powered via hamster wheel. However, please clarify your last statement. Should they be OBC only to create or to join? I don't ever see 100 OBCs coming into one game together, so I think it should be free for everyone to join. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
pudinrox
|
  |
| Joined: 30 May 2010 |
| Total Posts: 2358 |
|
|
| 12 Aug 2013 07:16 PM |
Look, 100 players would be quite cool, yet I keep testing 100 players, it dosen't lag on my computer as much since I have fast computer, but when there is a crowd you just start lagging, and on my old computer everyone turned into noobs and started lagging.
yup |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 13 Aug 2013 07:48 AM |
Support! Like ur idea! ~Jonmar |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Aug 2013 07:51 AM |
| Support all except the few parts thing. It's a user's responsibility to decrease their lag. They can do this by using their setting. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Aug 2013 06:02 PM |
| It would cost atleast a lot of money to run the 100 player servers, servers cost money + A full 100 server would just kill a computer |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 13 Aug 2013 06:06 PM |
| No, There should be just 50 player limit servers. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|