Quote from Ecu
Honestly, GoldK, what does it matter to you? You don't want to play on a server where money can equal power, we get that. Why should noone be allowed to? If that happens to be an environment a chunk of the community prefers, who are you to say it is wrong? Them playing that way doesn't hurt you at all.
I edited my post. To add to my personal opinion, I want a different pay model to multiplayers because it's hard to find a pay model that I actually like when the majority uses the p2w model. So it does affect me and maybe I will try multiplayer a try again when I see no more p2w servers. Since most of you are ignoring legalities, I might as well put in my personal opinions.
The post you quoted didn't say you HAD to use the "Pay to Join" route, but it is one of the best options to keep servers online.
0
I edited my post. To add to my personal opinion, I want a different pay model to multiplayers because it's hard to find a pay model that I actually like when the majority uses the p2w model. So it does affect me and maybe I will try multiplayer a try again when I see no more p2w servers. Since most of you are ignoring legalities, I might as well put in my personal opinions.
2
Are you implying the minecraft community doesn't want public servers at all and only play to show off power? Why bother setting up servers for them anyway if they only use servers to be elitist and not because they genuinely like server contents? That insight of yours gave one more reason why we should support the EULA. I think this will be a wonderful step in stopping elitism in the community when public servers are gone.
Common sense is mojang allows priority access. Period. You are grasping at straws at this moment in trying to validate your claim that p2w is better than equal gameplay with limited server access for free users. If you ask me, I would rather play in a server where everyone has equal power and I have the option to pay if I find the server interesting enough to have access anytime. If I don't have money, I will just have to wait and play during less crowded time or camp until one free player leaves. The server owner also saves money by maximizing player slots and adjust the free slots size to adjust income to server popularity. Everyone wins.
With the upcoming changes, it won't be as easy to ask for donations which is why I am suggesting to use other means if you really want to help a charity. Minecraft charity is not as big as more traditional charity out there so it will barely have any effect in the grand scheme of things. Beside, not all servers are going to run for charity. You said it yourself servers need money to operate and the overwhelming majority of the server will be used for profit instead of charitable purposes.
Did mojang made minecraft for people to make money out of it? No. It would be different if mojang encouraged people to make money from the start and then suddenly changed their statement. Those who will lose their "job" was their own mistake of making it a business when it was never meant to be just like those who made selling illegal drugs a business when the government forbids it. With the lack of p2w, you will need better features than ever so that people will pay and keep coming back for more. Who said you can't give the exclusive perks right now to everyone on the server so that everyone get to fully enjoy your server?
Good things I can think off: it will kill elitism among the community. Elitism breeds hatred and unfairness in gameplay and it would be better if elitists don't exist. Servers won't rely anymore on power to sell but on the server content itself which means more people willing to innovate something so that people are more interested to play in their server and spend money to keep it alive. Power selling is as simple as donate money for a stack of diamond which can be done by literally just typing a command. No innovation whatsoever. Close knit community will return with small servers being much more common just like the old days. Everyone knows each other and everyone plays nice and cooperate in making projects. This kind of environment is what we should encourage.
0
Then the problem is in the parents and not in the game itself and it is their responsibility to make sure their kids won't be stealing their credit card. Personally, I don't want my kids to do that either when they can enjoy playing on free servers instead of being spoiled by huge servers that drains money. Server owners just have to rely on the working adults playing the game and scale it according to the adults willing to pay for it. You can define priority access as gameplay advantage all you want but mojang clearly stated they are allowing it and sensible people would use that model instead of finding flaws on it and try to protest the EULA.
0
Where's the logic in that? Why would you let a good server you like die by not donating? Big servers =! good servers. You can have a huge low quality server that has p2w as its lifeline and medium sized good servers that live off to simple donations simply because people like the server overall and doesn't need additional benefits to give them money. Then again, maybe p2w does means good servers for p2w players.
1
It's amusing to see anti EULA people saying people like huge public servers but contradict themselves by saying no one is willing to pay to maintain those huge servers if there are no exclusive perks. The only one who will bring down your server is your own playerbase not Mojang. Mojang never restricted your income. It's your playerbase who is your boss when it comes to keeping your server alive. It seems you have no faith in your playerbase and they actually don't enjoy your server if not for the elitism it breeds. It's time for low quality content servers to die and actual good content servers that people are willing to keep alive survive.
Why don't you trust them? Is it because your server is actually bad and perks are the only reason it is alive? Cheap tactics like that won't work anymore and you have to make a server with good content to survive. People are not mindless creatures that you manipulate to regurgitate money by selling power. They are sentient beings capable of deciding if your server is worthy or not to spend money on. I am simply expressing my opinions that might save you from wasting your time whining and start rebuilding your server to have actual good content in it.
Gaming experience is not equal to server access. Read the EULA again where it states that gaming experience is about equality on what paying and free players can access on the gameplay. It doesn't state anywhere that every server should be free to access whether you paid or not. If anything, this is the loophole mojang left for you to use in monetizing the server.
So why use minecraft for charity? There other ways to have more generous people donate to poor people than minecraft. This is just a poor excuse in an attempt to keep selling power.
0
That is for the playerbase to decide if a server lives or die not the server owners. Are server owners feel threatened that the power shifted to the community? Supporters of EULA accepts the fact mojang has the power over their own game and that is a fact. Anti EULA people believes that they own the game to make money out of it which is exactly what a perfect world is, leeching off other's work without restriction.
Think of it this way
"This server is suppose to be pay to play but the owner is kind enough to let me play as a free player when the server is not full. If I like this server, I want to play anytime so I will pay. If this server is meh, I'll just wait for a free slots to play."
Pay to play means you are paying for access to the server you like but you don't have elitists who feel special than others because they bought power. Basically, you will be paying because you actually like the server and not because you were offered with power.
Why would you need the items then if you wanted to donate to charity? There is literally no reason you will need items if you really want to help the charity. There are other ways to donate to charity other than minecraft if you are wondering.
I haven't played a faction servers for a long time since I dedicated myself in playing around with cmd blocks. I know how to defend myself from p2w players by smart location of my base and I know my limitations of being unable to take down p2w players with full diamond gears with enchantments.
0
Remove the game items for donating and it should be good. The EULA clearly states that money should not equate to exclusive items to the donors no matter what that money is for. I think it would be better for the players to pay for the actual charity instead of the items and the charity is just the bonus.
0
Definitely not. That's like saying pay to enter server is pay to win but mojang obviously do not forbid that kind of server. You get the same features everyone has in-game but paying members get to play anytime they want. Gamplay fairness and server accessibilty are two completely different things.
I never assumed we are in a perfect world. If anything, it is the anti EULA people who live in a perfect world where you get to make money off someone else's game for a small cost (or no cost for cracked servers). All I am saying is you must adapt as a server owner to the size of your server in response to the projected decrease in paying players. Does it make a difference if the kid spends his money for perks or server maintenance? You speak as if the parents are getting something if the kid pays for perks. Only young adults or children would think that way about parents.
0
How is it good is very subjective which is why I try to reason in an objective manner with mojang knowing what they are doing. If you ask me for my personal opinion, I always hated inequality in games that favors paying players. Having a community that encourages equality and discourages elitism is better in my opinion. Server quality should go up because there is no more easy way of luring players to spend money and you have to make an actual good server to do it. There is no right or wrong opinion because personal opinion is subjective so we should not use it as a basis on why the EULA should or should not be supported.
Tell me, what's the difference between the $20 you spent for perks and $20 you spent for server maintenance? You spend the same amount of money in both cases but it is the attitude that matters here. Now that I think of it, why not make a server that is pay to enter but has all the perks in it? Would you pay for it or not just because there are no free players to abuse your power on?
I think even your grandpa knows that you pay money to use a service like paying a taxi to get you somewhere. Just tell them servers are like services that needs money to operate and they will understand unless you are a liar and your words can't be trusted.
0
Actually you can, provided the paying members and free members are treated the same in terms of gameplay. The only equality mojang wants is gameplay but they are fine if there is no equality in terms of how you access the server. Kicking a free player to make room for paying members is acceptable. That is actually more generous than outright restricting access to only paying members.
Because they know their game better and know what's good for it. You have to trust mojang on this one. They don't want minecraft to fail as much as we do but us and them have different ideas about it. If it works for them, then good. If not, they may change a few rules to bring back old monetization schemes. We will just have to wait and see and it would be better if the community doesn't actively destroy minecraft for not getting what they want like a spoiled child destroying everything after the parents denied him of what he wants.
0
Yes and I prefer small and private server because some people enjoy playing with a small group of friends. If you find Minecraft boring with smaller servers, then you are free to stop playing it. You have already given your $27 to mojang and it doesn't matter at this point if you quit playing or not. There are still tons of new potential customers coming in who finds the game fresh and willing to drop that $27 to mojang's pocket. So no. Minecraft multiplayer will not die as long as there are people who are contented playing in a small and private server and new players willing to play it vanilla. Minecraft dying is just an empty threat of greedy server owners hell bent on getting back their source of income.
Then it only means the community doesn't want these servers to exist. All they care about is showing superiority. Why cater to a community that doesn't care about your server? Also, parents are smart enough to know servers are not free and need money to keep going.
1
Everything lies in the hands of the minecraft community. Let them decide if a server is worthy enough to spend money on without any perks on it. I may sound like a broken record here but I repeat: If the community wants the server not to scale down because they genuinely like it, they will support it regardless of perks. Server owners are just threatened because they know that some players don't really like their server contents and they only come for the power when you buy something from the server. It is not up to the server owners to dictate how big their server is. It's up for the community to decide if they wanted your minigames to exist or not.
You are another misguided soul who mindlessly believe those greedy server owners about multiplayer servers dying with EULA. I ask you, what is minecraft somewhere in 2010 before public servers were popularized?
0
So you think a server with 100% paywall is much better than a server that accepts free players provided the server is not full? If you get kicked, you simply wait until the server has one less player so that you can join again or, better yet, pay the priority fee to have 100% access to the server anytime. I would prefer this than having p2w players showing off their superiority in the game and some of them have the tendency to abuse their power over free members.
0
My point since the begining: If your patrons wants to support your server with pure donations, then good for you. If they don't want to, then you have no choice but to scale down the server or shut it down. No one is forcing you to maintain your server size with reduced income.
So what if they don't want to spend money on priority access? Keep your server small then and scale it with your income. I am starting to think there is a requirement on how big your server is. Is there a hidden prize somewhere that awards the biggest server? Tell me about it
Children are more prone to be tempted to buy power than a simple server access. Of course they could always complain about a server ripping them off when they realized it doesn't look what they thought it would be and the server will be in deep trouble to the masses. Children won't call paying $100 for a stack of diamond a ripoff because they don't know what is the real value of diamond on legit servers. Overall, it's harder to ripoff someone with server access over power because the power satisfaction over another player is gone.
0
I will give you an advice how to start. Run a small and free server with priority access. If people do not like your server, you won't lose anything for hosting a free one. If people started to show interest by paying to have guaranteed server slots, then gradually increase that slot until you think you hit your server popularity cap. You won't be wasting player slots because you want your server to be as close to full as possible depending on how generous you are to the free players which means you will be paying minimal server costs.
It's harder to ripoff somebody when you are simply offering server access than by luring them through power. Having power means you can assert your dominance to free players while having server access don't have that kind of appeal. You have to charge fair if you want customers to actually like your server enough to pay and play.