[cod] Off Topic: Bad Company 2

Wed Feb 24 20:41:44 EST 2010

"Also if you look at the providers available, they are largely the who's who
of laggy server providers"

Is there a link to see who the providers are?

If there is can you please post it here

Thanks

WIzz

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Midnight <midowns at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is all speculation but...
>
> It's very contradictory, but my guess is that they want the few GSP's to
> provide free community servers, which they are obligated to do.  If they
> gave it out to anyone to host they have no guarantee of that happening,
> however there would be so many servers out there it wouldn't be an issue
> anyway.  Why this obligation is there I don't know.  Since if they wanted
> lots of free servers for ppl to play in then the smart thing is to just let
> anyone host it.
>
> As for cheating, not sure how it matters if they release the server
> binaries or not on that front, but then I don't write cheat software.
>
> If anything the biggest reason why this idea = fail is because of the lack
> of competition.  Since there are so few options in providers, if you don't
> like yours you only have a handful to choose from, and they all know this so
> they will all over stack their boxes to drive up profits.  Where you going
> to go if your server sucks?  Another gsp who also has lag.  So essentially
> it just will make for laggy servers and higher prices.  Smart move.
>
> Also if you look at the providers available, they are largely the who's who
> of laggy server providers.
>
>
>
> Caleb Stephens wrote:
>
> yeah I can't quite tell if it's an effort to reduce cheating (and have the
> ability to take corrective action and have enforcement authority) or if its
> a way to consolidate players and keep servers full ... thinking that it
> makes the player / user experience better. In truth it might be both.  I
> can't think of very many other reasons why they would do this.
>
> I can understand the cheating argument.  But I think this actually hurts a
> games popularity rather than helping it.  Far more clans would get servers
> if they could get it from their existing server providers etc., or just
> simply run it on their own boxes.  and it would be better for clans and
> players because it would be very price competitive, that would also
> encourage massive proliferation.
>
> Dunno ... I'm sure they modeled it out and it comes down to money.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Einar S. Idsø <einar.cod at norsk-esport.no>wrote:
>
>> It helps to be in a country where there aren't a gazillion providers
>> that are already "hooked up". Then size and age doesn't matter that
>> much anymore.
>>
>> Cheers.
>> Einar
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Oliver Warburton <olly at inx-gaming.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> > I can concur!
>> > It has nothing to do with meeting the requirements. We do and more.
>> > We run just over 1000 game servers, as does a colleague on another brand
>> > here in the UK. They aren't (able to) offering (offer) Bad Company 2
>> either.
>> > From that I could tell, there's one host for example that have been
>> running
>> > a few months, run a handful of servers, and have been approved.
>> > The requirement appears to be knowing the right person to talk to!
>> > Oliver Warburton
>> > Managing Director
>> > INX-Network LTD
>> > INX-Gaming.com
>> > www.inx-gaming.com
>> > Become a fan of INX on Facebook!
>> > http://www.facebook.com/pages/INX-Gaming/11051264033
>> > On 24 Feb 2010, at 17:42, Midnight wrote:
>> >
>> > You can't just meet the qualifications and get approved though.  I meet
>> the
>> > requirements and then some.
>> >
>> > I had been inquiring since 6 months ago, however it seems just like most
>> > things, you have to know the right people.
>> >
>> >
>> > i3D.net - Ramon Plaiser wrote:
>> >
>> > Providers are selected on various qualifications. One of them is being
>> able
>> > to host on a windows platform. No Linux bins are available.
>> >
>> > No provider will (or is allowed) to make contractual agreements between
>> them
>> > and EA public. Different games have different requirements and
>> > qualifications you need to meet to be considered as a ranked provider.
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> >
>> > Ramon Plaisier
>> > i3D.net Operations Manager
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: escapedturkey [mailto:escapedturkey at escapedturkey.com]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 9:38 AM
>> > To: Call of Duty server admin list.
>> > Subject: Re: [cod] Off Topic: Bad Company 2
>> >
>> > Is what this person saying true?
>> >
>> > "To become an EA trusted partner:
>> > EA requires you to give them 640 slots on 10 servers and you have to
>> > sign a contract to serve them for 1 year. You also must give EA full
>> > access to those machines in order to qualify. Also for every 10 servers
>> > you rent out you must provide EA 1 ranked server."
>> >
>> > http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/381849.html
>> >
>> > Midnight wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > They pick you.  It's closed so you're too late like most gsp's sorry.
>> >
>> >
>> > escapedturkey wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > How does one sign up to be a ranked server provider?
>> >
>> > Do the binarines support Linux?
>> >
>> > Thanks. :)
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cod mailing list
>> > cod at icculus.org
>> > http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> cod mailing list
>> cod at icculus.org
>> http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cod mailing listcod at icculus.orghttp://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cod mailing list
> cod at icculus.org
> http://icculus.org/mailman/listinfo/cod
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/cod/attachments/20100224/1bb587cd/attachment-0001.htm>