FO76- 'private' server and 'mods' in 'future' - meaning

[zanity]

A lot of very foolish people hold very tight to the interview where Todd says there MIGHT be private servers and server modding some distant time after Fallout:76 releases. But not one person I've seen take hope from this understood what Todd actually meant.

 

Let's deal with the 'private' server first, for I've seen no-one get this right. At the moment all Fallout76 games are on game instances where every one of the 24 players slots is filled by the master server. This is a FACT beyond any dispute. So...

 

Imagine you want to play with one friend online. Beth has TWO choices.

 

-1) A team-up in the lobby (Fortnite style) BEFORE you join a server, ensuring both of you are in the same game instance.

 

-2) A current player online search in the lobby, and a request to join the server where your friend is currently based. This is actually the method Todd explicitly stated is currently implemented. But there's an issue. Isn't your friend currently 'playing' with the other 23 slots of his server FULL. Why yes he/she is, causing you to have to wait until some rando on that server logs out- not ideal.

 

That's for TWO of you. Now make it TWELVE of you. For sure you could all meet in the lobby first, but that means everyone has to synch their schedule to the last minute- and who the heck wants that pain. But method 2, where you need 11 slots to free up, means each new member of your team could be waiting ages in the lobby.

 

THIS is where a 'PRIVATE' (once known as a CLAN) server takes meaning. A 'private' server does not mean a server whose code is under the control of one of the players, as so many fools think. No, a 'private' server is EXACTLY the same as a public, day-one server, save for the fact that a group of named players have priority (or maybe, far less likely, exclusive) use of that server. And possibly control of the game instance persistance. Now experienced online gamers KNOW why they want a clan server, so when Beth offers such a servce it is useful- but everywhere i've seen a discussion of 'private' by our folks, it is always to fundamentally MISUNDERSTAND what is meant.

 

And this brings us to the second part of what Todd said- mods on the private server. What Todd meant was GAME MODE mods from the Creation Club. Let me explain.

 

So Beth provides CLAN servers (private servers- as seen in Battlefield 2, for instance). And the players on that clan server want to play 12-vs-12 DEATHMATCH, which is not a default mode of the public servers. Simples. A game mode mod (almost certainly monetised) is downloaded from the official Creation Club, and activated on that server.

 

The game mode mod with be a Beth official code creation- wholly distinct from the possible COSMETIC furniture items beth may allow semi-independent modders to create and host on the Creation Club- and this is because CODE mods impact the server code and 'gaming as a service' concept.

 

WITHOUT clan servers, there could be no player mechanism for selecting an over-arching game mode on a server. Oh, for sure Beth could, as with Fortnite and the different team size servers, host various flavours of servers with different game types activated, but every interview proves this is the last thing Todd wants for the base experience.

 

So why was Todd so HESITANT in giving a cast-iron promise of clan servers and game mode mods, when these are still things 100% under Beth control,and having NOTHING to do with real modding as understood by users of the Nexus. The answer is that clan servers and server admins choosing an official game mode for the clan server is an idea that belongs to the distant past. Even this minor level of player control/choice has been smashed out of existence by EA, as the evolution from Battlefield (original and 2) to the latest Battlefield V has proven.

 

It is against 'gaming as a service' industry norms to now allow clan servers (which is what Todd meant by 'private'). It is against industry norms to allow a 'player' to control any aspect of a server.

 

No- what Todd wants, as he has stated repeatedly in his interviews, is for the players on a given instance of a game to have the spontaneous ability to come together and within that instance, VOTE/SELECT/AGREE to the type of 'fun' they wish to experience during that session- including the possibility of activating a mode like deathmatch. But ths version of 'democracy' could never ever work in practice (which is why clan servers were invented in the first place). Randos are just too RANDOM- a fact Todd is unaware of cos all his early online experience is with other employees at beth- individuals with the greatest incentive (their continued employment by Beth) to 'behave'.

 

As Todd's interviews prove, Todd hasn't the first clue about what randos mean in actual online games. Or actually his comment about 'private' (clan) servers and mods (server admin selectable game modes) does suggest that at the back of his mind he kinda does know.

 

To conclude, for classic fans of Fallout3/4/Skyrim, the stated possibiliy of future 'private' servers and game play changing mods on that server offer NO SALVATION. I appreciate many Fallout 4 players have never played an online game, and haven't the first clue about the industry history of online play, from the pure LAN of Duke Nukem and Quake onwards. The evolution. The CURRENT meaning of the terms used by Todd.

 

Indeed one thing I'd praise Todd for is his absolute honesty. Know this industry. Know the history of this industry. Know the current trends, and the semi-secret briefings given by experts in psychology and addiction theory. Then every word Todd says is without mystery- no matter how depressing the implications.

 

I think Fallout:76 will fail and fail hard, but I think Zenimax is more than fine with this. Fallout:76 is but a learning curve for Starfield and the next Elder Scrolls- the monetised always online titles to come. Wanna learn to ride a bike well, expect initial falls and scrapes. Beth wants to be king of monetisation and addiction gaming. If you didn't get that message loud and clear from Beth's recent E3 conference you really were not listening.

[JimboUK]

No one knows what they're planning and that's why it's wise to wait and see, you may well be right and the vague nature of Howards reply didn't fill me with confidence, however there is a chance they'll do the right thing, a small one admittedly but one nonetheless.

[Deleted54170User]

I'm so glad the future of Fallout 76 isn't going to be a lonely existence with a bunch of companions that stand around like tree stumps unless you add a mod to allow them to relax.

 

Of course it is entirely a question if I can actually blast debris away, and remove road blocks of old buildings so I don't have navigate around through passages, train tunnels, border walls, and navmesh that isn't properly set up.

 

Too many times I have walked right into an invisible wall, where, clearly is a space large enough for a Mutant to walk between walls or rocks.

[Deleted54170User]

I could have posted this link in this thread and it would have been even better here than where I posted it. I get so confused at times.

 

Blame Sheogorath! Or blame it on all times I landed on my feet instead of falling on my head. I've have tried, but falling on my head just seems impossible when I try to jump off my back first. :laugh:

[fftfan]

If you are correct wouldn't that cause Fallout 76 to be guilty of false advertising?? Maybe not the kind that would lead to actual lawsuits against them but Steam is very good about refunds, they'll let people refund beyond 2 hours gameplay or 14 days from purchase in cases where the Developers outright lied about their game. Like No Man's Sky. So long as it isn't beth launcher exclusive we'll be able to ask Valve for refunds if this happened.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/8qc4b9/private_moddable_lobbies_confirmed_for_fallout_76/

"We love mods. So we are 100% committed to doing that in 76 as well. We will not be able to do that at launch, though. Our goal at launch -- this is really new for us -- is have a well-running, robust service. And then some period later (we're still currently designing what that service looks like), you'll be able to have your own private world, and be able to mod it, and do all of that. With our games, we think that's where the long-term life of them really is... that is trickier when you get into an online world, but we are definitely committed to it, it just won't be at launch."

Their statements seem to directly contradict this.

[Dukoth]

ok zanity, I'm starting to think you has a serious issue with obsession or something like that, this isn't healthy

[fftfan]

ok zanity, I'm starting to think you has a serious issue with obsession or something like that, this isn't healthy

Yeah after reading the post on Reddit outlining Bethesda's statements I am convinced this isn't happening. We would be able to mass refund by complaining to Valve about Fallout 76 lies about Modding Support. Game modes "stuff" like in zanity's post ≠ Mods. I think only EA would try to pass that sort of thing as "modding support" though they wouldn't even do that cause they hate mods.

 

This scenario being true would literally make Fallout 76 be 2018's "No Man's Sky-type" scandal and I really don't think Bethesda would commit PR suicide. It would damage trust so much that it would literally still hurt the sales of Starfield/TES 6 even if they corrected policy for those just from residual anger.

[JimboUK]

 

ok zanity, I'm starting to think you has a serious issue with obsession or something like that, this isn't healthy

Yeah after reading the post on Reddit outlining Bethesda's statements I am convinced this isn't happening. We would be able to mass refund by complaining to Valve about Fallout 76 lies about Modding Support. Game modes "stuff" like in zanity's post ≠ Mods. I think only EA would try to pass that sort of thing as "modding support" though they wouldn't even do that cause they hate mods.

 

This scenario being true would literally make Fallout 76 be 2018's "No Man's Sky-type" scandal and I really don't think Bethesda would commit PR suicide. It would damage trust so much that it would literally still hurt the sales of Starfield/TES 6 even if they corrected policy for those just from residual anger.

 

 

Wait until the private servers with mod support are up before parting with your money, there's no rush, digital copies aren't going to run out.

[fftfan]

Wait until the private servers with mod support are up before parting with your money, there's no rush, digital copies aren't going to run out.

Yeah seems like the only way to go. I might see if there could be preorder option where I can freely choose to cancel at any time and don't have to pay upfront, only pay when game ships. So I could play the beta but IDK I might just say whatever and stay completely out of it till private servers with mod support are literally here and Nexus has a 76 Nexus with amazing stuff like maybe a Sim Settlements 76 edition. Probably seeing an SS76 is what'd get me to fully buy in and be on board with the whole idea.

 

Though Bethesda's whole "Rebuild the wasteland Together" tagline seemed to scream out modding imo. I don't see what else they could mean than our fantastic modders rebuilding the wasteland with NPCs, quests, awesome stuff to build with, etc.

[Dukoth]

i was being serious with my statement, I've seen this bitching cycle with Bethesda games going back to NV so ultimately I dont take anyone to seriously, but I dont recall seeing anyone with zanity's level of....commitment.... before, this guy has been spamming rather LONG posts almost daily for the past week or so on this topic and making equally as long reply's in those and other posts and honestly it strikes me as a little obsessive

 

I dont know, maybe I'm just worrying about nothing here