The majority of the servers are dead or dying; they’re not fun to be on bcs what makes them fun, the players and sociality, is gone or fading. The amount of people that actually play the game is low enough to have just two servers - one East Coast and one West Coast, with layers.
And why is Activision-Blizzard not doing this? Bcs they charge an arbitrary price for server transfers, bcs they continue predatory practices and couldn’t care less about the community.
Change my mind.
We are preparing data and content to provide to all the major gaming blogs and publications to shine a light on Blizzard ignoring this growing issue. We even have some major content creators interested in our stories. If an update is not provided, we will be relentless.
Normal or PVP? RP or not?
Why even have characters locked to servers? How about just have servers dynamically added/removed based on current online population?
Poke Willee. A(nother) youtube video from a major content creator could work.
They could definitely just go ahead and merge deviate delight with Grobbulus. I recently transferred from DD because I absolutely couldn’t find anyone to group with, or even do 2 person quests. It’s terribly unfortunate that they’ve allowed an issue to be so ignored that we have to spend extra gold just to play the game the way it was intended. But hey I suppose that’s their goal.
You mean like Benediction?
I mean dynamically add/remove servers based on online population, rather than have characters locked to any given server.
Best thing to do at this point is to quit cause seriously, they’re not gonna merge servers till the oct/nov subs are gone. Just soak your money up and you’ll keep spending it cause ‘I have the money to.’.
Unfortunately with the ability to turn pvp on or off in game the server you roll on means little. I prefer RPPVP for the color and community involvement; but, alas, the LFG and trade chats on Grobb are no different today than on any other server.
This would mean “Everyone in one server” but at any given time you might be firewalled off from your friends. It would be better to simply have one server with many layers, if that’s what you want.
You would never be “firewalled” from your friends. But certainly, if you wanted to coordinate group play you would need to be on the same server with your friends.
There are many ways to allow that to happen.
Provided that layering allows for an unlimited population on a single server, that could work. I’m under the impression though, that that is not the case.
How would you achieve this? Your statements contradict each other.
They do not.
If a character is not locked to a server, and servers dynamically are added/removed based on current online population, you would still have servers, and you would still need to be on the same server as your friends to engage in content together.
But you would have to have control over that fact, therefore you’d be able to dynamically move between servers at will, therefore servers are pointless and there’d be no requirement to “be on the same server” because it would all be seamless and dynamic, just like Retail is now.
Yes! That’s something you’d want to have available. Just be able to select which server to log into.
It might be that there would be a queue for one (or some) and not for another (or others).
Well, having to log into a server or move between then doesn’t make them pointless. You’d still want to be able to play the game. And servers enable that.
Retail doesn’t have dynamic servers.
Cross realm zones / connected realms etc are dynamic servers, because forming a group will “move you to someone else’s server shard” in the way you’re suggesting.
Servers are pointless for your goals, and a single ‘mega server’ should be what you’re aiming for, because arbitrary server separation is pointless.
In the past, Blizzard has at least recognized this is an issue.
Connecting the low-population realms to other existing realms" will give players more opportunities without having to shell out for server transfers. From your history with your guild to your interactions with the economy around you, a realm with a healthy population provides more opportunities.
As WoW has evolved, we’ve seen players naturally gravitate toward a subset of very active realms, leaving behind lower-populated realms. Due to the massively multiplayer nature of World of Warcraft, certain kinds of gameplay experiences simply aren’t well-suited to a low-pop realm
This have been taken from past announcements when talking about the issue with low pop servers. It was seen as an issue to gameplay in the past. Why is it not being treated with the same look now?
And this is being experienced over multitude of servers. At this point Blizzard should merge, or connect, the realms to create ones are sustainable.
I see what you’re saying. They effectively accomplish the same thing, yes.
Interesting point. But yes, that could also work, though having actual servers that are dynamically added/removed to support the currently online population could have control structures in place, such that it would be possible to regulate faction balance, if such is deemed viable (and yes, it would be possible on server clusters, too).
I suppose “pointless” is a matter of perspective. Taking the long road to create a technically much more complex and difficult system that ends up accomplishing roughly “the same” as a much, much simpler approach may be “pointful.”
The reason why I say its pointless is because Blizzard already has this technology, and uses it in Retail. It’s not the true mega server yet, but it’s clusters of super servers all able to interact seamlessly without issue.
What you’re asking for is CRZ and Layering.
As well as Classic Era. There are server clusters.