Funcom plz tell why Most players have unaceptable pings

[aocjv]

Well i love when people like to come to this sort of conclusion.
Yes i loved the game. Do i love it with this new latency? Yes i do. Is it playable for me since all i do is pvp? No its not.
There you go m8, i love combat style of this game and i love melee chars. Sadly they are almost unplayable with 200 ms. I guess people that play it casually can still pull it off, but for those of us that like speed, movement and precision its not the same any more.
Will i quit?
I dont know, i will probably give it some time to see how will it look when servers are merge and will us players advantage be huge comparing to eu.
Will i sub?
Not if this is not sorted.

There is no confusion here. Instead, we are disagreeing on mere semantics.

Therefore, let's come to an understanding of "meaning" so we have something solid upon which to base a debate.
1.) In this context, the meaning of "love the game" means the player still enjoys playing the game and will not take a negative action such as quitting / cancelling sub.
2.) In this context, the meaning of "they don't love it anymore" means the direct opposite of definition #1. Therefore, they find the game unplayable, not the same as what they used to and want, and will take a negative action such as quitting/cancelling sub.

Those are the simple definitions for this context so a reasonable discussion can happen.

Each one of us can have one of the following three states:
1.) still "love the game", therefore continue playing despite whatever new handicap you experience, and will continue playing (and paying).
2.) "don't love the game anymore", therefore will be quitting soon and cancelling sub
3.) Undecided - we are not yet sure if we still "love the game" (and therefore continue playing and paying) or if we "don't love the game anymore" (and therefore will quit and unsub). You are in this state, according to your own statements (e.g. "Will i quit? I dont know, i will probably give it some time")


It is that simple. And as far as a business (like Funcom) is concerned, only these three states are important. The more people in state 1 ("love"), the better for them. If some are in state 3 (undecided), then that's better than being in state 2 ("don't love anymore") and maybe the state 3 people will eventually go back to state 1 after a time.

Any other semantics don't matter, because only the end result has an actual effect (to paraphrase shakespeare "to sub or not to sub"). It doesn't matter if you profess in your words to love the game but end up unsubbing. As far as any business is concerned, you are in state #2 ("does not love the game anymore"). And it doesn't matter if you keep trolling the forums and complaining and saying you hate the game, as long as you are continually playing and paying, you are in state #1 ("loves the game"). That's all that matters.

[aocjv]

Let's hope then, that they have those tools, the correct data needed and the competence to use and interpret them correctly. I've worked with enough tools myself to know, that the existence of those tools and a theoretical base, does not always mean it gives a correct answer or is used well. The hardest part might be the interpretation and presentation to those in charge for decisionmaking (just take some mathematical models that work only under certain conditions for example and there are people who will take even a 1% chance of success by a model as "great! let's do this!", because it is what they want to do anyway).

Correct.

All statistical models produce probabilities, not guarantees, and the reliability of the probabilites themselves depend on the quality of data and the fitness of the model used. There is never a guarantee.

As I explained in an earlier post somewhere in here, using data-driven decision-making methodologies is not a guarantee for success. I also noted that even if a company were to make 100% correct decisions 100% of the time, that is not a guarantee that they will not fail/go bankrupt, as there are an endless list of possible external factors that may simply be insurmountable regardless of what actions are taken (and I've cited some of these external factors such as economic conditions, pre-existing market conditions, etc). Tough, but that's how it is. As a customer who wants to enjoy AOC much longer than my existing sub (I think my current sub will end around May 2014), I am hoping that Funcom is, indeed, making the right decision AND that the cards aren't stacked against Funcom.

[Kurt2013]

Not completely agreeing with the semantics in the previous post, because it leaves out people that are f2p (old vets or new players or people subbing only in intervalls). You made it look like, that if you love the game you would automatically consider subbing. That's flawed imo, because you can love the game, but not sub (if you are a vet pvper with good enough gear for example, if you prefer old world and levelling, if you got enough to do and are short on money etc.)...as well as still subbed, but disliking the game (because of changes, ingame problems etc.). Also you can be subbed and not play at all (no internet, computer broke etc.).

Especially for these people a good shop design, thought through special offers and good reputation of the company comes into play (for example if you love it, but aren't subbed you will play and do positive advertising and spread good rumors, while if you don't like it or "liked it", but got somehow annoyed, you will play and spread bad rumors and negative advertising).

[Arishanya]

Times like this must be annoying for volunteer moderators. All time saying follow social guide lines, follow something, delete posts, merge threads, ban people, tell them again to follow social guide lines...

I feel sorry for them
They are lucky, because i hardly feel sorry for anyone usually

Annoying? A little. Stressful? Very.

Because remember, we are players just like you. Some of us are from EU and some of us are from US. And while we have our own personal opinions on the move (how it has or hasn't affected our playability of the game) we have to remain as objective and unbiased as possible when moderating. We have Funcom leaning over us with the guidelines/expectations of how the forums are to be maintained, and we have you, the player base, voicing your own guidelines/expectations of the game you play...and we are in a way, torn between the two. But bottom line, regardless of what I or any other mod may personally think, we have to moderate as Funcom dictates (this is their forum, after all).

Personally speaking, it sucks to infract people. It sucks to ban them. It sucks to edit/remove posts. But it's the 'job' we signed on to do ('job' being that we volunteers and aren't Funcom staff), so we do it as well as we can. What sucks the most though is when we get personally attacked for doing the 'job' we are meant to be doing. Don't shoot the messenger kinda thing. But without people breaking the Social Guidelines we would be out a 'job'. So as much as it sucks to have to take action against 'you guys', you do give us 'job' security!

(BTW I am NOT giving you permission to break the Social Guidelines by saying what I just said.)

[aocjv]

Not completely agreeing with the semantics in the previous post, because it leaves out people that are f2p (old vets or new players or people subbing only in intervalls). You made it look like, that if you love the game you would automatically consider subbing. That's flawed imo, because you can love the game, but not sub (if you are a vet pvper with good enough gear for example, if you prefer old world and levelling etc.)...as well as still subbed, but disliking the game (because of changes, ingame problems etc.). Also you can be subbed and not play at all (no internet, computer broke etc.).

Especially for these people a good shop design, thought through special offers and good reputation of the company comes into play (for example if you love it, but aren't subbed you will play and do positive advertising and spread good rumors, while if you don't like it or "liked it", but got somehow annoyed, you will play and spread bad rumors and negative advertising).

In the context of discussing effects to a company, we have to adhere to the strict definitions because it is what makes a difference to the company.

Let me get some phrases from you and attempt to clarify:
"if you love the game you would automatically consider subbing" - Yes, subbing or spending coin in whatever way such as item shop purchases. This is what matters to Funcom. As far as they are concerned, if you do neither, then they have failed and you don't "love" the game. You may tell others you do, and you may, in fact, feel that you love the game. But business-wise, Funcom sees it that they have failed to make you "love" the game because you didn't bring out your wallet.

"...as well as still subbed, but disliking the game" - In this case, as far as Funcom is concerned, you still "love the game", because you gave them money / continue to give them money. The moment you stop giving them money, you go to state #2. If you don't stop, no matter how much you protest in forums/guilds/blogs, you still "love the game" because you voted with your wallet. That is all that matters in the business.

"Also you can be subbed and not play at all" - Indeed, and in this case, again, as far as the business is concerned, you still "love the game" because you are still a source of income. The moment you stop giving them money, you go to state #2, but not before.


This is why it was necessary to remove the semantics of the common and very personal interpretations of what "love" means, and instead focus on the business-aspect of what it means. Everybody will have their own definitions of "love" or like or enjoyment. As a business, it doesn't matter what your personal definitions are, only that you give the business your money.

There is no other definition that is relevant business-wise. You may personally hate or love or like or dislike or enjoy or derive pleasure or boil in anger over this game, and that's all fine and dandy. But that's irrelevant to the bottomline. What will classify you as either state #1 ("love the game") is if you give and continue to give them your money, and what will classify you as state #2 ("don't love the game anymore") is if you stop giving them your money, regardless of your personal assessment of your hate/love/joy/anger. That is all that businesses see. You are either a source of income or not. There are a few nuances here that I am skipping because they are more suited to an economics and management blog rather than a videogame forum, but that's how it works in general and in most cases.

[Kurt2013]

I was just a bit picky about the focus on "subbing"
But if you replace it with "spending money" it covers a lot more (and even makes a working and attractive item shop even more important).
Still i will keep at it, that the reputation is very important, especially if it gets too negative. It will have an effect, and worse, as company you will not get feedback of it directly (a bit like behind the back mobbing). There are examples of companies having underestimated this or thought "worst that can happen is people not buying".

[Arishanya]

This is why it was necessary to remove the semantics of the common and very personal interpretations of what "love" means, and instead focus on the business-aspect of what it means. Everybody will have their own definitions of "love" or like or enjoyment. As a business, it doesn't matter what your personal definitions are, only that you give the business your money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think 'love' is the wrong word to use. Perhaps 'support' is a better choice? I clearly understand what you are saying, but 'love' is an emotionally charged word and may cloud people's interpretations of what you are describing.

[Radek87]

They will be Crom and Fury after merges. Sorry You keep your ping, we want our names.

yeeey

[yuisoku]

(BTW I am NOT giving you permission to break the Social Guidelines by saying what I just said.)

Hmm, i was not intended to do that, but now that you gave me a idea....

Cool reply btw

[mrcorp]

Yes, this seems like a difficult challenge. However, this and even more complicated scenarios are routinely dealt with by quantitative methods. Statisticians solved problems like these long ago, and currently have so many models available at their disposal to deal with these scenarios. Any reasonably modern data analysis system (we don't even have to go to expensive Oracle / SAP / SAS solutions) can model data such as you describe and proceed to give you probabilty distributions.

In other words: What you describe is not a problem for people whose job is to actually analyze data. We've solved it long ago, even before computers, but now that we have powerful computers in place, it's even easier. I don't know how complex and capable Funcom's data analysis tools are, but as long as they aren't stone age, we can safely assume they are capable of modelling and running simulations for the complex data you describe.

Please explain how either Oracle, a database that stores data or SAP, an inventory solution will help solve funcoms ping issue? By the way, SAP can run on Oracle, they are completely different and unrelated to anything you suggest.

What funcom needs to do is look at diverse computing. For example, if funcom were in the AWS, that is Amazon Cloud, they could use solutions like Cloudfront where the product would be greatly enhanced via distribution of data anywhere, versus from a single server point. I run a few companies in Amazon who are nation wide, and latency from east to west coast US is bad in itself,let alone across an ocean. So solutions like this would benefit them greatly where the client location isn't as important to delivering a product. More than likely they have a simple backend of a few web/app servers with a main DB or 2 in the back. A mail server, probably a DNS for backend direction of local traffic and etc.

The challenge for them is when AOC wsa created, this tech did not exist, and today, they are some great solutions, but would NO doubt require recoding. And given its an old program at this point, recoding would be too costly. I am going through this now for a major credit card processor. So version 2 needs to be considered if anything as an alerntative solution, and would help them bake in some new stuff as well as kick out some old stuff like purple drops and etc, that just adds extra code. Make it lean and meaningful, if you will.

However, its in their luck you all want server mergers as it will help them reduce costs. Its easy to make an image of a server today, and launch it with greater architecture quickly (1 hour). So moving from 16 core to 32 core and doubling ram is a no brainer for any one technical in any way. Trust me, if I can do it anyone can do it. This is truly a win win for them, that is until they encounter issues like the point of this thread.

If funcom wants, they can do some great things. It comes down to costs. That is the only factor. They have the talent, or the talent can be gotten. But how much would it, will it, costs is the key. If its not worth the return, why bother.