Splintering Players Trough Server Options

[Karmaterror 982]

Well theres a few hot topics that have the community devided atm. Things like 3rd person vs 1st and day/night cycle speeds. 

 

Iv seen quite a few people say it could be server options, have 1st only, 3rd only and some with fast day night some with 24hr cycle. But this makes me wonder, with having so many diffrent servers could it splinter the playerbase just as we saw in the mod.

 

If you think of dayz commander the options (ignoring heavy mod servers) are like -

 

Dayz

Dayz Namalask

Epoch

Orogins

ect...

 

If the devs have many servers with diffrent options it could end up the same way except instead of the above your choices are -

 

Normal 

Normal with fast day/night

1st only, normal day/night

1st only, fast day/night

3rd only, normal day/night

3rd only, fast day/night

 

And that only takes the view and day/night into it. Theres other things people have suggested to be server options that would add to the amount of server types. I think the devs need to find a good balance and keep all servers universal. That way we shouldnt break up players in a similar way that the mod did.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Karmaterror

[Max Planck 7174]

I don't really understand how having server options would splinter the community. Just because people have different preferences and play on different servers, we are still one community.

One forum (and reddit!).

 

As long as the server options stay somewhat true to the original idea, I wouldn't say any were better than others.

Just that some were better for me.

[Karmaterror 982]

I suppose what i mean is that, the players all broke up on the mod....ran off to diffrent variations. If most players opted for fast day night, it would leave the 24hr cycle servers a bit empty, Kinda like vanilla z servers emptied when things like epoch came out. I Just dont want it to end up like the mod where you carnt find a populated 24cycle because everyone is on the fast day/night servers 

[Lady Kyrah 1109]

That's assuming you will have any kind of control on servers in the end.

[Karmaterror 982]

Oh yeah its a complete hypothetical, just wanted to raise the question and see what people think. Would a universal server setting be better, keeping us all playing the same game. Or would having different settings break up the players over different variations, making some (most likely the very realistic hardcore modes) a bit devoid of players.

[louist 163]

Still, having different server options allow players to find the version of the game that most appeals to them. Everyone ends up happier.

The splintering debate is something of a problem because of server limits. While there are technically 350K players (or whatever we're at now), we can only interact with 39 others at a time. So 350K or 200K or 100K isn't as big of an issue as it appears on paper.