Is your online gaming experience in jeopardy?
- Posted May 17th, 2008 at 15:37 EDT by
- 8,453 views
- 37 Comments
What would you do if your online gaming experience was determined by your internet provider and not whether a server was dedicated or not? You may soon be given the opportunity to find out, as Virgin Media’s CEO, Neil Burkett, has decided “this net neutrality thing is a load of bollocks.” Burkett happens to also run a cable operator that provides around 3.6 million people in the UK with internet service. What makes this dangerous is the fact that Virgin is already in talks with unnamed content providers about having their content delivered faster than companies that aren’t willing to pay for the privilege. So, in theory, this could result in us, as PlayStation Network users, being limited in our access speed to online games such as Warhawk, Call of Duty 4, Rock Band and the like.
A small scale example of what is potentially about to occur is something that happened within the community of YouTube.com. YouTube was at one time deleting non-partner videos from the top viewed lists in order to make room for their partner’s videos. This lead to a decently-sized outrage from not only a few users, but from the YouTube community itself, and eventually lead to a changed approach to the situation. While this may only affect a small few, the idea of funneling more views to one channel over another is a similar problem to what Virgin is thinking about implementing but on a much larger scale.
One of the YouTube channels that spurred the revolt was AtheneWins, which is created and ran by a group of individuals out of Belgium, who also happen to support a thought they created called, I Power. I Power is based around the belief that every individual has the right to make the changes to be who they want to be. They’re also known internationally for their political endeavors under the name NEE.
I Power has recently started a “Stop Virgin” movement to prevent this incident from ever taking place. They realize that this is something all ISPs have been trying to achieve, yet none have ever blatantly stated it like Virgin Media. They understand that if Virgin succeeds in regulating your internet usage like television networks decide what you get to see on TV and what you don’t, the global trend will then begin and this will eventually affect everyone around the world. I sought out a comment from I Power in regards to this issue and were provided with the following:
“In a climate without net neutrality, you'll have big online games like World of Warcraft offering an enjoyable experience since their developers have the budget to reserve their high-bandwidth spot with all the ISP's but you'll have the ISP's actually crippling the traffic of online games that are not on their partner-list. It's a logical result of all data traffic being commercially prioritized. Several high-profile inside sources have actually let us know that you may not even have access to non-partnered servers/sites without additional payment to your ISP, we have some new info on that which we discussed in a recent I Power clip.”
By now, you’re probably figuring out how this could eventually affect you and the joys you get from online gaming. Well, what if one of these ISPs decided that Call of Duty 4 only promotes war and violence and thus chooses to make your experience on the server sluggish? You’ll be playing on a delayed connection while everyone around you will be taking you down before you even see them coming. Is that something you’d enjoy? What if Activision wasn’t willing to pay for Virgin’s subscribers to have speedy access to their online games? The possibilities on how this could eventually change online gaming and lower its appeal to the user are endless.
Do you want this happening to you?!
One of the biggest suppliers of an online world for gamers is Activision Blizzard and through their title, World of Warcraft, they have amassed over ten million subscribers to their service. I decided to get in contact with their online department in order to find out how this could eventually affect their userbase and they were kind of enough to give us a reassuring comment.
“The online performance of our games ... (continued on next page)
- Page 1
- Page 2
Comments
-
juicyd |
IBJuicyD & (DSI) ATREBLEDIPTRIP- 3:52pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 1
Man, if this crap becomes reality nobody will be able to have a decent game online, EVEN pc gamers will be affected by this. i kind of think that if it does happen, there will be a lot of pist of gamers on all formats, and believe me when i say, NOBODY WANTS TO PISS US OFF. apart from commercial use of the internet, gaming is one of, if not the most profitable for companies, so i think they'd be shootin themsells in the foot there!!!!
-
Acid-Hippie2007 |
Acid-Hippie2007- 4:02pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 2
This is crazy I can't believe any real gamer would agree with what Virgin is trying to do. Just another case of a BIG company trying to tread on others.
-
Die-romantic |
Demon_King- 4:03pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 3
If this happens in the future might as well hurry guys and boycott Virgin before Resistance 3 50 v 50 is wrecked
-
-
Paranoimia |
Paranoimia- 4:22pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 5
In relation to this story, please check out this article at The Register.
-
-
-
Paranoimia |
Paranoimia- 4:50pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 8
@ jaybiv - Hopefully, there will be a similar reaction here in the UK if they decide to try it.
I have been a happy customer of Virgin/NTL for many years now, but a lot of recent incidents are angering me. Unfortunately, where I live, the only alternative ISPs provide a slower and/or worse service, so I can't be too quick to jump ship.
-
DaveW |
Paranoimia- 4:56pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 9
Jaybiv, the problem with this, is there is no real way to get them. ISPs will just claim faster services to certain companies, while leaving the other companies on a "standard" service. The problem with this is the fact that those "standard" services, will feel lagged in comparison to those "faster" services. This isn't "illegal" at all and ISP/Congress would probably never even happen.
-
Phantasmn |
PHANTASMN707- 4:57pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 10
Some of you guys haven't read the article very well. If one ISP is able to do so, then All ISPs will soon follow. This is why the Net Neutrality movement is important, but even that has it's share of problems.
And to those of you that think that this couldn't happen [in America].
Remember the whole Comcast debacle over limiting bandwidth for users sharing files via P2P/using bit torrent and clones of bit torrent / limewire? It's not flat out illegal, but they stopped because consumers weren't happy and congress got involved (correct me if I have any details incorrect).
If they are allowed to limit the bandwitdh per household, then they could also limit it for certain companies/websites and charge a premium for certain services. Comcast even said that they want to charge more for people that use youtube and other video sites intinsively.
-
-
-
Atreides
- 7:05pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 13
Its not just Virgin, other companies have been trying to do this as well, and yes even in America, though we are fighting back, if you are interested in fighting back, a good place to start is at www.savetheinternet.com
-
-
-
-
-
pizzamonkio
- 8:34pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 18
i live in ontario canada and have Rogers high speed we have to pay for additional levels of bandwidth and get charged extra if we go over. so wouldnt companies using this isp for gaming servers be subject to the same bandwidth constrictions and resulting penalties? this doesnt sound like it will happen here the c.r.t.c. is pretty strict about shady things like this. just switch your isp theres always going to be the "other" guy.
-
jaybiv |
jaybiv- 9:32pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 19
dave, yes they will get caught. eventhough comcast was interfering with p2p networks where people were probably trading copywrited materials, they still took a beating. the main fear factor in america is that the isps do not want congress to dictate what they have to do, because we all know that when congress interferes it usually screws things up--in this case it would be on behalf of the consumer. if they are smart, the isps will not try to implement this stateside.
-
Raptor-21
- 10:56pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 20
Then some new ISP will come about offering net neautrality, everybody will flock to them, they'll get loads of money and the rest of the industy will follow suit trying to get a chip in and get some of the cash.
Btw, I know nothing about how the industry works, but I see something like the above happening if this takes place. (perhaps not the 'all the other ISPs wil go back to net neautrality' part, but there will be some ISP that will stick with net neautrality.)
-
JD-82 |
JD-82- 11:02pm BST - May 17th, 2008
- 21
I'm glad that my new house has a BT line...i've had Telewest (now Virgin) broadband since it's inception but this plus a few recent things I've noticed have put me off them completely...I'll be hooking up my Sky Broadband at my new place and taking on all comers...
Seriously though, this is something that can be put off for a while but it'll happen eventually...BT recently ran what equates to Spyware on their customers by monitoring the websites visited to provide "better and more appropriate advertising"...this software was piloted in secret and people only found out by accident...
-
-
-
GunTeng
- 12:09am BST - May 18th, 2008
- 24
MMmmm...More and more companies are starting to come down with MSS (MicroSoft Syndrome).
At this rate the world will become an ailing cesspool of greed making large companies filthy rich & the lowly commoners become malnourished and die from lack of internet.:lol:
Well...if these idiots carry out such an action, they would very very quickly find more competition for ISP's that offer what we get today. Eventually, they would lose so many customers that they would effectively put them out of the ISP buisness.
Personally, If I had an ISP that determined whether I could play a game or not I would tell them to go fudge. I want my online experience to get better...not worse.
Its almost like they are trying to go back in time. Soon enough we would be back on pay-as-you-go style internet with mounting phone bills every flaming month.
Virgin and every other ISP need to get this idea out of their heads ASAP, for their own good.;)
-
InfernoReaper |
GrimDarkling- 1:37am BST - May 18th, 2008
- 25
@ jaybiv: Don't be naive. Our Congress doesn't give a damn about anybody. The US has become too dumb to realize that there is NO LAW forcing you to file your taxes.
There will be no backlash with this because every company will do it at the same time, just like with oil prices now. People will complain but they will be forced to deal with it because they let themselves get too attached to these things.
I don't get the speed I pay for as it is. I check every day through speedtest.net and they always short me by at least 1MBps. It's hard to notice when you pay for 7 and you get 6, but the price is utter crap. Ever notice cable companies can raise their speeds every year to be higher than DSL, yet never need new equipment? Everything is already there and they keep the bandwidth down to meet the market. Time Warner customers could easily be getting 50MBps for the same price as 7MBps, but the market isn't there yet.
-
-
-
-
Zippie151 |
Sanguineous- 6:26am BST - May 18th, 2008
- 29
Lol typical virgin and typicla british thinking i might add. "Hmm what does everyone use a lot that we slap an extra charge/limit on??? I Know the internet!!"
This attitude for charging for anything and everything that people seem to get enjoyment out of is just plain ridiculous, sure the ISP fees as they are, are understandable but limiting what you can use it for when YOU are paying for it in the first place is the bollox here! -
Kung_Fu_Russ |
kung_fu_russ- 10:18am BST - May 18th, 2008
- 30
What with this and the fact that they are not just 'cooperating' with anti-piracy agencies, but ACTIVELY VOLUNTEERING the names of their customers who fileshare, I think it may be time for me to move away from my Virgin service, even though it would mean a massive cut in net speed. (I can only get 2 meg from any BT-reliant service, but I currently pay £45 !!!!! for 20meg)
-
-
bracomadar |
bracomadar- 1:58pm BST - May 18th, 2008
- 32
I don't agree with Virgin, but if you don't like it, complain to the company, not your government. I had trouble a while back with my DSL disconnecting. I called my ISP’s help desk a few times, and probably others around here did the same thing because they eventually fixed the problem by adding a new junction box down the road. If you want to get nothing done, or get things even more screwed up than they are now...waste your time getting our government involved. Companies don't make decisions that will cost them money. Those that do, go under. If enough people complain about their service, stop using it, and the company starts losing money, then they'll change for the better, or go under. Either case, there will always be some company out there that will give people what they want that others won't. If there's money to be made, somebody is selling it. People sell bottled water and make good money off of it because people are willing to buy the stuff. Who would have thought you could bottle water, something just about everyone already pays for at home, and make money off of it? However, if somebody tried to sell muddy water with sticks floating in it for $100 a bottle, nobody would buy it and they’d go out of business. If you get government involved where they say what these companies can and can't do, then you get a bunch of companies with basically the same service, or one big crappy monopoly. People gripe about gas prices, but if our government didn't get so involved in telling the oil companies what they could and couldn't do and using our tax dollars to bail them out of trouble...then people would have started switching over to better ways to fuel a car a long time ago. Unless a company is directly in the process of harming somebody, like dumping toxic waste in your back yard, then government shouldn't get involved in helping them or hurting them and remain neutral. We are the consumer and we're the ones who control how much money/power they have. If you don't like the way a company is doing business, then stop doing business with them. That simple act says more to them and hurts them more than any politician ever could.
-
-
-
TwiSta |
TwiSta- 8:30pm BST - May 18th, 2008
- 35
Bracomadar, your comment was nearly as big as this article and therefore I didn't read it, please shorten them next time into bitesize pieces. As for Virgin, just change ISP if it ever happens and put them out of business, that will stop other ISp's following suit.
-
SpyroViper
- 4:41am BST - May 19th, 2008
- 36
Virgin Sucks. Why bother doing this? Just leave thigns where they are!! I guess if it becomes true in the near/mid future because it isn't gonna happen soon, the only safe way to play online is with blizzard, they rake in millions a day. Starcraft 2 is going to be safe!! :P
-
TSS.BLOOD
- 6:23pm BST - May 19th, 2008
- 37
We all know that petition's never solve anything, NEVER. So we have no other alternative but to turn to Extremeism, if this blasfamious act HAPPENS, all gamers must riot, and protest, "We dont want totalitarian net!!!!" "Give me game, or give me death!!!" I will be dammed if I have to pay extra!!
Advertisement