Path of the Vampire forum

Pi dArtois wrote:Curiously, what are people's rationale for their no vote on the poll?

Repeat:

Would it slow the game down?

Would it take forever to move? and refresh?

I honestly do not know.. which is why I am asking.

If it would slow the game down. I vote no.

If the game hosting your tiles, at a cost, is the only option.. I vote no.

Pi dArtois wrote:Curiously, what are people's rationale for their no vote on the poll?

Do you really think it's a part of a red square ownership to continue to pay a perpetual per annum outgoing?

Initial investment: Approx $150-300
Investment to have abodes decorated: $50-$150
PA payment to host images; $24-59

I'm not sure I'm willing to continue an ongoing payment just so Davids game continues to look pretty. This may be a personal thing, but I've absolutely refused in the past to play any game which expects a monthly subscription (been there, got burnt, won't do it). This is different in how it has come about but it poses the same expectation and I'm finding myself disliking the ongoing monetary obligation implied.

I'm ruminating on it, but I am curious about others' rationale.

if you had read this thread...you would know why we are voting no.

Pi dArtois wrote:Curiously, what are people's rationale for their no vote on the poll?

Do you really think it's a part of a red square ownership to continue to pay a perpetual per annum outgoing?

Initial investment: Approx $150-300
Investment to have abodes decorated: $50-$150
PA payment to host images; $24-59

I'm not sure I'm willing to continue an ongoing payment just so Davids game continues to look pretty. This may be a personal thing, but I've absolutely refused in the past to play any game which expects a monthly subscription (been there, got burnt, won't do it). This is different in how it has come about but it poses the same expectation and I'm finding myself disliking the ongoing monetary obligation implied.

I'm ruminating on it, but I am curious about others' rationale.

As others pointed out, adding image hosting might well slow the site down and at the very least create more work for David when others would prefer to see others things done for the game. (*cough*moremasterypowers*cough*)

I did vote yes but after I read other's opinions, I wished I'd waited. Without David weighing in we can not be 100% of what kind of slow down there might be but I'd say any extra slow down wouldn't be worth it.

If there was no slow down and it was an easy to-do then I'd still say yes but imo David could charge karma for that, which could be a good thing. More revenue fpr Mooncalf Studios.

My main reasons for voting no:

- Eats server resources and can potentially cause lag and other issues.
- It takes David away from coding things that really enhance and benefit the game like the rest of the mastery powers, fixing the labyrinth, adding other new features.
- There's plenty of other free or inexpensive hosts including imgur and imgshack.
- I don't see the benefit for hosting them 'on-site' vs. a free host. Especially since it'd require the coding of an image management system so people could delete their old images and upload the new ones. Otherwise, you'll end up with a lot of dead files floating around.

Hosting the square images on-site was a part of another game I was a part of, so I used that experience in my decision.

Pi dArtois wrote:

[...] This is different in how it has come about but it poses the same expectation and I'm finding myself disliking the ongoing monetary obligation implied. [...]

There is no obligation considering there are reliable, free options around:

Amalea wrote:[...] - There's plenty of other free or inexpensive hosts including imgur and imgshack. [...]

It's a no from me.

As a coder, and while I don't know how phpbb is, but with jcink and IF, if there's too many on the server it will lag significantly and cause crashing. I've never had any issues from imgur nor tinypic, both of which are image hosting sites I've used for ages (I still have things from ten years ago on tinypic when I first began doing graphics).

I agree with Amalea's player, too, that it would take David away from more important things to code (personally, I would love a mobile app), not to mention if something screws up, its very possible that it can mess up the layout of the game - say it's not the perfect dimensions, etc.

I'll reply longer when I'm home; but my from the hip view of areas of concern are.

My annual recurring spending decisions aren't based on Davids decisions to maintain server functionality so game play isn't impacted. As a game player I spend money cause I want a game thing and To get the game thing Im happy to pay for it.

This is a different monetary ask. This is asking people to continue to pay for something in order to benefit everyone else, and more specifically David.

So for me yes, I'll happily pay for development. I'll happily pay for creating the tiles.

But it feels to me that if David wants his site to remain pretty, so people who play his game continue to have a consistent gaming experience, his risk mitigation (i.e.: when people bugger off and stop paying their imgr subscription) is to ensure key grid squares (red public spaces) and former its Sanctuary apartments are hosted where they don't turn to ****.

This is really his concern, not mine. If he doesn't mind his site looking like bleagh, then hosting core images should be a part of his business risk plan. I might leave the game in four years and then what??

But why would you pay for something that literally takes maybe five minutes out of your day to upload and place? You'd be spending the same amount of time doing something that you're paying for him to do, that can potentially slow the game system that others pay to have it running at a functional speed.

And this isn't me being rude towards David -- but the quality wouldn't change, and what if the server crashes and files are lost?

Pi dArtois wrote:I'll reply longer when I'm home; but my from the hip view of areas of concern are.

My annual recurring spending decisions aren't based on Davids decisions to maintain server functionality so game play isn't impacted. As a game player I spend money cause I want a game thing and To get the game thing Im happy to pay for it.

This is a different monetary ask. This is asking people to continue to pay for something in order to benefit everyone else, and more specifically David.

So for me yes, I'll happily pay for development. I'll happily pay for creating the tiles.

But it feels to me that if David wants his site to remain pretty, so people who play his game continue to have a consistent gaming experience, his risk mitigation (i.e.: when people bugger off and stop paying their imgr subscription) is to ensure key grid squares (red public spaces) and former its Sanctuary apartments are hosted where they don't turn to ****.

This is really his concern, not mine. If he doesn't mind his site looking like bleagh, then hosting core images should be a part of his business risk plan. I might leave the game in four years and then what??

When the images for the cemetery in the QZ buggered off, David (or Nat?) placed grass tiles in there. So I'm sure that could be done again for any other huge eye sores that could pop up.

I did that to some spots recently where I lost images on grid. It's not as pretty, but it's not as horrible as that pb warning thing.