Question: Are feeder towns killing the game?
how would it be different if they were not feeder towns? how would you enforce "no feeder towns" since many family members play on different devices You actually should be clamoring for feeder...
Forum Discussion
NarraMine88 wrote:AJtheboss1 wrote:annettemarc wrote:NarraMine88 wrote:imdreaming691 wrote:
Dead towns take up disk space, the cheapest part of computing infrastructure. It would be my guess that a town's layout only takes up 1 Mb at absolute max.
But when you multiply that by.. 70 million?
That's seventy terabytes. My home computer's got two.
EA currently boasts thatTSTO has been downloaded 10 million times. Lots of those are the same person installing it on multiple devices. Wonder how many of those were reinstallz after uninstalls to try to fix it when it crashes for good. Wouldnt it be a hoot if they also reported how many uninstalls there were.
It IS frustrating that we can never actually delete a town. I'd think EA would be happy to take them off their servers. Those are just dead weight.
:)
I really don't think that towns take up that much space once everything is coded. Think about it. The game is only about a 1gb. If one server has 100TB, all it needs is one copy of everything which is 1gb. and everything else is just placement information just telling where each thing goes in a grid. That shouldn't take more then a few megabytes at most.
You're probably right... It's just there's no way to know how many millions of dead towns there are... It probably doesn't really make a dent. Bhjt someone mentioned land... Would deleting dead towns make more "room" for land? Or does it just not work that way?
It doesn't really work that way, since land isn't server end issue, but a device issue. The problem with adding more land is that most older devices wouldn't be able to run the game well enough for them to implement it. It's the stability that's causing land release delays.
