How much $$ would you need to provide DEDICATED SERVER?

[GSGregory]

Originally Posted by hooby

I don't believe this has anything to do with "difficulty" or cost. Blizzard could have most easily provided offline/singleplayer/LAN play, had they wanted to. That they did exclude that options has entirely different reasons.

Requiring people to create an online account and permanently link their game (serial number) to it, and forcing always online play is a form of copy protection (and used game sale protection).

But the main reason I believe is the RMAH. Only items found on secure online servers can be sold in the RMAH, and only people playing on secure online servers can buy from there.
If someone plays D3 solo only, but does find that one crazy item they don't need for their own character, chances are they'll put it up for sale (which wouldn't happen were they playing offline).
If some plays D3 solo and totally gets stuck and frustrated on inferno, chances are they might buy that one item from the RMAH, to give them the boost needed to go on a bit (which again couldn't happen if they where playing offline).

Forcing all players to only play online, increases the number of potential sellers and buyers on the RMAH. This means it increases the potential profit for Blizzard. And that's the sole reason why they do it imho.

Yeah, they totally killed all chances for modding in the process - but modding doesn't make them money anyways, so they don't care.

Just to add to this but item drop rates are balanced to increase rmah use as well.

[medierra]

The first thing I should say is that secure online play is in not mutually exclusive to offline single player or LAN. This shouldn't be debate about which one we should support. If we had secure mp, we'd continue to allow solo offline play and LAN.

It is difficult to estimate the scope of the engineering work necessary to facilitate secure mp and that could be somewhat variable. Unfortunately, we'd have to estimate our costs toward the higher end to reduce risk. We'd need to re-architect parts of the engine / networking so that multiplayer games could be run server-side. Then there is all the infrastructure stuff like setting up servers, account management / login, data storage, etc. Finally, we'd have to pay for hosting costs and someone to keep it all running.

I don't think I'd want to try tackling secure mp with less than $500k in additional money just budgeted for secure mp development and really, I'd feel a lot more confident if that number were closer to $1m. If I had another $500k right now though, I'd much rather use it to expand development of the main game. If we somehow ended up with $2m to $3m, then I'd start thinking more about secure mp.

[Phant]

Originally Posted by medierra

The first thing I should say is that secure online play is in no mutually exclusive to offline single player or LAN. This shouldn't be debate about which one we should support. If we had secure mp, we'd continue to allow solo offline play and LAN.

It is difficult to estimate the scope of the engineering work necessary to facilitate secure mp and that could be somewhat variable. Unfortunately, we'd have to estimate our costs toward the higher end to reduce risk. We'd need to re-architect parts of the engine / networking so that multiplayer games could be run server-side. Then there is all the infrastructure stuff like setting up servers, account management / login, data storage, etc. Finally, we'd have to pay for hosting costs and someone to keep it all running.

I don't think I'd want to try tackling secure mp with less than $500k in additional money just budgeted for secure mp development and really, I'd feel a lot more confident if that number were closer to $1m. If I had another $500k right now though, I'd much rather use it to expand development of the main game. If we somehow ended up with $2m to $3m, then I'd start thinking more about secure mp.

I really appreciate the insightful post. It's something I really know nothing about on the back end, just assumed it was quite a bit more complex than "Let's buy a bunch of boxes and store all this data in it"

The game looks fantastic from what I've seen and I can't wait to dive into it with secure multiplayer or not. I just find myself so far in the corner for secure multiplayer when it comes to aRPGs and can't stress enough how much weight I place on the community of them when judging the overall product. Legit trading and legit characters to hack 'n slash with are what I'm referring to here, I think it really helps the longevity and replayability of the game. Just my .02 here of course.

[Kyon]

Yes very good post . Arthur please with this money make SP and LAN game best with this engine . This time we not really need a secured server . Peoples still playing TQ . There is no server . Later risks are reduced maybe something happen but this time I really want a high quality bug-free RPG game :P

[Phant]

So I've got a hypothetical now:

Say Grim Dawn releases with single player and open muiltiplayer and has a large (subjective word, yes, I don't know what "large" would constitute dollar wise) amount of success. Would implementing secure server side storage for multiplayer be something Crate would entertain as a new feature down the road after release?

Some follow up comments to my hypothetical, I'm not sure if that would be something that would have to be executed in an expansion or if something that drastic could be implemented in a patch or something.

[Kyon]

I never need a server . I need really good game .

[eisprinzessin]

@ Phant ...

Originally Posted by medierra

[...] If Grim Dawn is successful enough though, we might be able to set up secure servers in the future. I would definitely love to be able to offer this (and play on them!)

[Phant]

Thanks Eis, must have overlooked that bit of info. Guess they don't call you the minister of information for nothing.

[imthedan]

Sadly, I think the game will fail without secure servers. Titan Quest was an amazing game, but without secure servers and once I found there was a hack to boost your guy to max level and give him insane stats, it killed the game for me completely.

I could invest all the time I wanted. I could find one of the better items in the game, but someone else could just 'create' these for themselves in seconds.

I don't care what anyone says; ARPG games are about the loot and trade. It revolves around this. If anyone can create the best items in the game, then there's no point in searching for them.

I really hope you guys find a way to get dedicated servers or at least find a way to stop hacks. :/

[Kluga]

Originally Posted by imthedan

Sadly, I think the game will fail without secure servers. Titan Quest was an amazing game, but without secure servers and once I found there was a hack to boost your guy to max level and give him insane stats, it killed the game for me completely.

(Not to sound like a fanboy), but you know that TQ actually turned a profit for the publishers, right? I'd say it was far from a failure.

The following is a quote from a RPS interview with Arthur (aka medierra):

Originally Posted by interview

...If you take the case of Titan Quest and Immortal Throne, information I’ve been given put the combined sales over a million copies in late 2008. At that time I heard that it had reached profitability for THQ. Since then it has continued to do surprisingly well in digital sales given its age...

I didn't feel as though secure servers weren't really missing from TQ and I'll likely feel the same about GD. If you're just selective about who you LAN/play online with then you shouldn't be subjected to excessive amounts of hacking.

Also note that a few posts above medierra said they'd need 2-3 million dollars to start thinking about creating secure servers. So maybe one day, but for the time being I think the money is better spent elsewhere