Seems like your reading comprehension is lacking, so I’m going to encourage you to reread the entire exchange up to this point. If you can’t figure it out, you’re not someone worth discussing with.
Comment on Statement on Stop Killing Games - VIDEOGAMES EUROPE
paraphrand@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoThat sounds like an online only title. I thought we were going to “change that.”
AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
pugnaciousfarter@literature.cafe 3 weeks ago
What do you mean?
Changing the design happens during the pre-production. This will not effect any games retroactively. As unfortunate as it is, until the EU parliament decides on a law or regulation all games destined to die will die.
paraphrand@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I mean, taking a 100 person battle royal and changing it so dramatically would be quite odd to do.
VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 weeks ago
It’s possible to host your own Arma server that can handle 100 players. Ironically Arma has a Battle Royale mode. It’s not rocket science.
paraphrand@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Sounds like that’s the answer to my reply then. Not all this other noise people have posted. 😏
Goodeye8@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
What exactly is this dramatic change that you think would have to happen?
paraphrand@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I think it mostly revolves around how you get 100 players together for a good game. The match making part. I’m skeptical of the quality of match making, but that’s not a showstopper for people committed to playing. But if we set aside the need for someone to maintain hosting, then it becomes peer to peer or a lan party, or a combination of the two.
I remember what it was like rounding up and wrangling 80 people to raid in WoW back in the day.
And none of this is a showstopper I don’t see why we can’t talk about that. It’s not like discussing the difficult edge cases or the feasibility of the details could harm things.
My initial question in this thread framed changing the game design, not networking stack.