Death of the MMO?
by Alan H · in General Discussion · 05/10/2006 (11:37 am) · 38 replies
Http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.internet09may09,0,4559120.story
Not just the death of the current internet. But MMO's that the corporate mongers don't approve of or are eating up their bandwidth. Sur-charges, higher prices for porducts, small indie sights can't compete, downloads costing more and more, downloadable games going the way of the dodo bird.
Glad to see the politicians have the publics best interest at heart again.
Not just the death of the current internet. But MMO's that the corporate mongers don't approve of or are eating up their bandwidth. Sur-charges, higher prices for porducts, small indie sights can't compete, downloads costing more and more, downloadable games going the way of the dodo bird.
Glad to see the politicians have the publics best interest at heart again.
About the author
#2
It's not laughable...in fact, currently it's predetermined, and will happen unless the Internet community does something about it.
The reason is because it's not your ISP's that are going to be controlling this, but the owners of the Internet backbone infrastucture.
Many people have been hypothesizing about why Google has been buying up unused infrastructure, and while many people do love google for being the "good guys", little is known about their plans--but all of those purchases are expensive, and don't make financial sense unless there will be a return on investment...and google isn't the only ones out there doing this type of thing.
05/10/2006 (12:21 pm)
Disclaimer: The following represents my personal opinion, not an official GarageGames position!It's not laughable...in fact, currently it's predetermined, and will happen unless the Internet community does something about it.
The reason is because it's not your ISP's that are going to be controlling this, but the owners of the Internet backbone infrastucture.
Many people have been hypothesizing about why Google has been buying up unused infrastructure, and while many people do love google for being the "good guys", little is known about their plans--but all of those purchases are expensive, and don't make financial sense unless there will be a return on investment...and google isn't the only ones out there doing this type of thing.
#3
@Stephen - it would make since why Google is buying like you said. I'm one of those who don't believe Google is somekind of saint. They are a buisness with money and power. They are run by humans, therefore they are corporate America just like CBS, NBC, Fox, Verizon, Cingular, AT&T, etc - it's all about serperating the people from their cash as efficiently as possible.
So, no more 1st Admendment Rights on the internet for Americans - unless your willing to pay cash for it.
05/10/2006 (12:32 pm)
@Ryan - you pay because they give you no choice.@Stephen - it would make since why Google is buying like you said. I'm one of those who don't believe Google is somekind of saint. They are a buisness with money and power. They are run by humans, therefore they are corporate America just like CBS, NBC, Fox, Verizon, Cingular, AT&T, etc - it's all about serperating the people from their cash as efficiently as possible.
So, no more 1st Admendment Rights on the internet for Americans - unless your willing to pay cash for it.
#4
They did it with news papers, they did it with television. The internet is just another evolution of information flow.
Just wait for Trusted computing to make another pitch, and sooner or later that frog in the pot will soon realize it's too late.. The water is boiling..
05/10/2006 (12:44 pm)
Welcome to the 21st Century. Where power no longer comes from arms, or weapons, but who controls the information and how fast you get it or need it.They did it with news papers, they did it with television. The internet is just another evolution of information flow.
Just wait for Trusted computing to make another pitch, and sooner or later that frog in the pot will soon realize it's too late.. The water is boiling..
#5
If something stupid like that were to take place then look for a smart company to realize this isn't what users want, and look for them to profit handsomly.
Maybe I've fallen off my rocker, but I can't imagine anyone thinking something like this would ever take a strong hold in the United States.
Land of the free until proven otherwise (in this case, at least).
05/10/2006 (12:47 pm)
If someone starts redirecting my traffic I'll unplug. Seriously. No joke.If something stupid like that were to take place then look for a smart company to realize this isn't what users want, and look for them to profit handsomly.
Maybe I've fallen off my rocker, but I can't imagine anyone thinking something like this would ever take a strong hold in the United States.
Land of the free until proven otherwise (in this case, at least).
#6
05/10/2006 (12:59 pm)
I really got to work on my move to Belize and start the hat weaving business I have been thinking about.
#7
@Ryan: the problem is that the "smart companies" are the ones that listen to their shareholders, and all shareholders want is profit...and this is an untapped revenue stream that IMHO outstrips anything currently known to mankind (except possibly $5 a gallon gasoline).
And as I said above, the issue here is not at all under control of the service providers, but the backbone owners--an aspect of the Internet that is currently so transparent as to not exist in the consumer's mind, which is why I feel it's going to take the world community by surprise when it becomes reality.
Edit: Look at Microsoft's history: grabbed a (for the most part) completely unrecognized value and capitalized on it. Looking back it's one of those "no one ever thought that type of power (financial mostly, but political as well) could ever exist in a company, but there you go.
As was stated above, in the 21st century power is in the hands of those that control information--and currently the political folks have no real understanding of what that means, but the tech savvies do--and they are positioning to grab all they can with the politicians saying "sure!" as quickly as they can.
Going to drop out of this conversation--it's a hot button for me :(
05/10/2006 (1:02 pm)
Again, personal opinion vs. offical one:@Ryan: the problem is that the "smart companies" are the ones that listen to their shareholders, and all shareholders want is profit...and this is an untapped revenue stream that IMHO outstrips anything currently known to mankind (except possibly $5 a gallon gasoline).
And as I said above, the issue here is not at all under control of the service providers, but the backbone owners--an aspect of the Internet that is currently so transparent as to not exist in the consumer's mind, which is why I feel it's going to take the world community by surprise when it becomes reality.
Edit: Look at Microsoft's history: grabbed a (for the most part) completely unrecognized value and capitalized on it. Looking back it's one of those "no one ever thought that type of power (financial mostly, but political as well) could ever exist in a company, but there you go.
As was stated above, in the 21st century power is in the hands of those that control information--and currently the political folks have no real understanding of what that means, but the tech savvies do--and they are positioning to grab all they can with the politicians saying "sure!" as quickly as they can.
Going to drop out of this conversation--it's a hot button for me :(
#8
This is just a move from US government to take another step toward "freedom" and get to control the internet. Internet as a whole is a pain for governments as they have no or little control over it.
Anyway, like Todd I think that it's time to think about my own "hat weaving" business somewhere sunny and technology free.
05/10/2006 (1:35 pm)
What is the problem of these backbone company ? I pay for my traffic. I pay a monthly charge to receive internet to my home, and I pay a monthly charge to my hosting company to host my websites. Both come with some limitation in term of bandwith and volume. So infact I am already paying for more than I am realy using. This is just a move from US government to take another step toward "freedom" and get to control the internet. Internet as a whole is a pain for governments as they have no or little control over it.
Anyway, like Todd I think that it's time to think about my own "hat weaving" business somewhere sunny and technology free.
#9
Because of this very troubling soon-to-be standard internet practices for backbone providers and even some ISP level practices like QoS the internet as we know it today most likely will die forever and therefore run the internet into the ground as a useless medium for data communication. The real question is what is going to become the new internet (not the one AT&T/SBC, etc.. want it to be), wireless mesh networking, consumer level satellite communications? Who knows...
05/10/2006 (2:51 pm)
@Claude: The problem is greed and that's what it comes out to. They're loosing their grip on the telephone industry and they believe that they can get it back by tollboothing the internet. The thing that pisses me off the most is the fact that the government is promoting it by allowing ma bell to return (the big AT&T back before the 1984 de-monopoly).Because of this very troubling soon-to-be standard internet practices for backbone providers and even some ISP level practices like QoS the internet as we know it today most likely will die forever and therefore run the internet into the ground as a useless medium for data communication. The real question is what is going to become the new internet (not the one AT&T/SBC, etc.. want it to be), wireless mesh networking, consumer level satellite communications? Who knows...
#10
Maybe I'm alone in this, but I'll be the first to unplug if network starts getting routed like the article predicts.
Surely I'm not wrong in thinking everyone will just go along with something crazy like this, am I?
05/10/2006 (2:53 pm)
The problem is these companies won't have customers anymore.Maybe I'm alone in this, but I'll be the first to unplug if network starts getting routed like the article predicts.
Surely I'm not wrong in thinking everyone will just go along with something crazy like this, am I?
#11
I pay for my site and bandwidth becuase the price I pay is far exceeded by the service I receive. If I were placed in a position where my site could possibly become largely inaccessible, well, I'd shut the site down.
Given that I'm a wannabe indy and that my site is built soley for that purpose, you can quickly see the problem escalating when you relate it to the hundreds of thousands of ecommerce sites run by individuals and small businessmen.
Actually, the more I think about - and understanding that a large chunk of the US economy rests upon the back of small and medium business, I think this could have a disastrous effect on the economy.
Picture hundreds of thousands of revenue generating - tax paying business shutting down simultaneously.
~ Yikes.
05/10/2006 (3:04 pm)
Think about what this would do to many, many webhosting compaines.I pay for my site and bandwidth becuase the price I pay is far exceeded by the service I receive. If I were placed in a position where my site could possibly become largely inaccessible, well, I'd shut the site down.
Given that I'm a wannabe indy and that my site is built soley for that purpose, you can quickly see the problem escalating when you relate it to the hundreds of thousands of ecommerce sites run by individuals and small businessmen.
Actually, the more I think about - and understanding that a large chunk of the US economy rests upon the back of small and medium business, I think this could have a disastrous effect on the economy.
Picture hundreds of thousands of revenue generating - tax paying business shutting down simultaneously.
~ Yikes.
#12
I am not worried, the legislation will pass, and it will fail at the same time. A business man would see this as an opportunity, to "bring back" what we already have, and more likely than not, make more profit than the current corporations who are offering these "two lane" internet highways. Which gives me every reason to believe this is exactly what google is doing, they are going to tap into the newly created mega billion dollar market. If what I suspect is right, we are in great luck as this will neutralize the market more than it already is, as speed will be less of an issue (assuming you live in a google service area, which by the looks of it, will be almost everywhere).
Looks like the CEO of google is the next richest man in the world :-p
05/10/2006 (3:08 pm)
From an investigation I have done recently, google has applied for permits in many US and foreign nations to lay giant coper wiring, along with fibre optics and other backbone equipment. This to complement their aquired backbones. This is good news, or maybe bad, as google will have direct access to the ISP, bypassing government regulation (look into it further for more information). This will deliver web access at a speed not available to residential consumers right now.I am not worried, the legislation will pass, and it will fail at the same time. A business man would see this as an opportunity, to "bring back" what we already have, and more likely than not, make more profit than the current corporations who are offering these "two lane" internet highways. Which gives me every reason to believe this is exactly what google is doing, they are going to tap into the newly created mega billion dollar market. If what I suspect is right, we are in great luck as this will neutralize the market more than it already is, as speed will be less of an issue (assuming you live in a google service area, which by the looks of it, will be almost everywhere).
Looks like the CEO of google is the next richest man in the world :-p
#13
- Google could play the role of the "good-guy" we all desperately want to believe they are, and become the savior of the internet as we know it by offering a newer/better backbone.
OR
- Google could play the role of the monoplistic-american-coporation and try to use their new backbone to capitlize on this new "2-lane system". At which point the internet as we know it dies off. Which will probably give rise to some new technology or an "open-source" internet or somthing else etc.
Does that about cover it?
05/10/2006 (7:30 pm)
So basically this could go one of two ways: - Google could play the role of the "good-guy" we all desperately want to believe they are, and become the savior of the internet as we know it by offering a newer/better backbone.
OR
- Google could play the role of the monoplistic-american-coporation and try to use their new backbone to capitlize on this new "2-lane system". At which point the internet as we know it dies off. Which will probably give rise to some new technology or an "open-source" internet or somthing else etc.
Does that about cover it?
#14
The scale of which they are building this new backbone system is amazing, google is going to have a lot of power. When I first cought wind of their new construction plans, I thought to myself "Why would google want to make a second internet, it's stupid." This was last summer. Obviously somone at google new this was going to happen, and I now have a new respect for how unreasonably smart google has become.
If what I assume is going to happen, this new google internet will be operated solely by google, and no others. If this does happen... You think Microsoft owns the world, just wait until you see what google has up it's sleeves.
I just can't see why they would build their own backbone CLOSED network if they are planning to jump on the corporate band-wagon, it makes absolutely no sense financially. If they solely bought the backbones, that would be one thing, but they are building a second internet, that is a fact, it's just a matter of what they are going to do with it.
05/10/2006 (10:07 pm)
I would lean more towards the first option Steven. If the majority of the coporate world heads to the new system, there will be much more money in it for google if google went the other direction.The scale of which they are building this new backbone system is amazing, google is going to have a lot of power. When I first cought wind of their new construction plans, I thought to myself "Why would google want to make a second internet, it's stupid." This was last summer. Obviously somone at google new this was going to happen, and I now have a new respect for how unreasonably smart google has become.
If what I assume is going to happen, this new google internet will be operated solely by google, and no others. If this does happen... You think Microsoft owns the world, just wait until you see what google has up it's sleeves.
I just can't see why they would build their own backbone CLOSED network if they are planning to jump on the corporate band-wagon, it makes absolutely no sense financially. If they solely bought the backbones, that would be one thing, but they are building a second internet, that is a fact, it's just a matter of what they are going to do with it.
#15
Google always has been better, anyway. They release almost everything they make for free and make money off advertisers using their service rather than the consumers. They sort of 'Get' what the Internet is for IMO.
05/10/2006 (10:19 pm)
I think Google understands people better than the larger companies, I'm sure they'll use their power for good rather than monopolizing free information.Google always has been better, anyway. They release almost everything they make for free and make money off advertisers using their service rather than the consumers. They sort of 'Get' what the Internet is for IMO.
#16
When I search, I'm looking for the information I want - not what some corporate schmo says I can have. Google would be render nearly useless to me if these changes were effective right now.
05/11/2006 (10:31 am)
Well, if you think about, we'd all have substantially less use for Google's services if all it could serv up was one big fat corporate advertisement.When I search, I'm looking for the information I want - not what some corporate schmo says I can have. Google would be render nearly useless to me if these changes were effective right now.
#17
05/22/2006 (11:36 am)
Would it be a good investment to buy lots of stock in google right now?
#18
05/31/2006 (8:18 am)
Why is Google the good guy? 
#19
I should point out that Google does more than a few "questionable" things, such as helping to jail dissidents in foreign countries (the excuse that China would toss them doesn't mitigate that in my mind), and distributing a desktop search tool that actually uploads your documents to their server "for faster searching" (I actually banned it from my company's network because of that). Some of the things they do are a security threat to people as well as companies- maybe not a threat from them, but from others who would break into their network. Other things? Well, let's just say that they are ethically "agnostic"... ;)
Whichever way they go on this issue, I'd be wary of them, and not see them as a savior of any kind, as much as just being opportunistic in really cool company's clothing.
05/31/2006 (10:37 am)
Quote:I think Google understands people better than the larger companies, I'm sure they'll use their power for good rather than monopolizing free information.
Google always has been better, anyway. They release almost everything they make for free and make money off advertisers using their service rather than the consumers. They sort of 'Get' what the Internet is for IMO.
I should point out that Google does more than a few "questionable" things, such as helping to jail dissidents in foreign countries (the excuse that China would toss them doesn't mitigate that in my mind), and distributing a desktop search tool that actually uploads your documents to their server "for faster searching" (I actually banned it from my company's network because of that). Some of the things they do are a security threat to people as well as companies- maybe not a threat from them, but from others who would break into their network. Other things? Well, let's just say that they are ethically "agnostic"... ;)
Whichever way they go on this issue, I'd be wary of them, and not see them as a savior of any kind, as much as just being opportunistic in really cool company's clothing.
#20
help get info into the country. Kinda a slow way to kill communism by letting capitolism eat it like a cancer.
MMO's are not going to die lol...
Just because people like SOE have ruin EQ, EQ2 , SWG etc into the ground with years of constant nerfs.
What has happend is they are trying to tune MMOG's to these people that pay good money to go to these fan faires and neglecting the casual gamer that used to play MMOG's on occasion..
Now SOE is about to ruin Sigil games Vanguard... yea the people that they fired .> EQ's creators..
Gonna have Smedley poo (nerfs) all over it...
05/31/2006 (7:27 pm)
I think the reason google is in China. Besides the money, is they hope that even gimped they can help get info into the country. Kinda a slow way to kill communism by letting capitolism eat it like a cancer.
MMO's are not going to die lol...
Just because people like SOE have ruin EQ, EQ2 , SWG etc into the ground with years of constant nerfs.
What has happend is they are trying to tune MMOG's to these people that pay good money to go to these fan faires and neglecting the casual gamer that used to play MMOG's on occasion..
Now SOE is about to ruin Sigil games Vanguard... yea the people that they fired .> EQ's creators..
Gonna have Smedley poo (nerfs) all over it...
Torque Owner Ryan J. Parker