Square Enix Collective no longer publishing Boundless

Steam page still shows SE as the publisher.

I mean … give them a second, yeah? :wink:

1 Like

I should add, I hope I don’t end up eating crow lol. Just looking at things cost-wise, it doesn’t seem like this change would negatively effect things. I have no idea what James thoughts are, moving forward though.

Edit to add: now we know Boundless now self published on Steam

4 Likes

When SEC collaboration was told it wasn’t good sign, because Grin story delivered bad image related to SE name :confused:

I waited 3 hours, couldn’t wait much longer :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

Got our update! :grin:

(If anybody coming here directly and didn’t see)

6 Likes

Exactly! That’s why boundless and its community has an important place in my life, we all have different opinions, whatever one may think or say has always been done with respect.

I mentioned it in my first topic, it is very rare that I post in forums, almost never, either by fear or shyness, maybe because of my limited English Lol.
I retain positive in this adventure, by love for boundless and with your help to all here, I managed to overcome this fear, I could never forget that and whatever happens in the future I want to thank you all here to have taken part in this human adventure.

8 Likes

Another possibility I could see is something I mentioned before. To cut down on server cost, they cut down the number of permanent planet per region, to possibly 6. Sucks if it happens, but if it would mean the game survives, I’d be fine with it.

3 Likes

Me too I’m on a Sovereign

no thank you! :sweat_smile:

We know from statements made by Phil that the steam revenue alone was not enough to pay for the servers. It will be interesting to see if the revenue from PS players is enough to make up the difference. If not then this suggestion makes sense to me. Phil had indicated the server costs are in the low thousands per month. So if it was say $3000 per month that would be more than 600 people paying for gleam club each month. It is more than 600 since Steam and probably Sony/PS get a cut of the money. If it is $2000 per month then it drops to over 400 gleam club members per month.

I think it is also important to remember that the reason we have so many planets is planets were added after launch to accommodate more players. As an example planets were added during the Steam Free weekend in order for there to be enough low level home planets for the more than 1000 simultaneous players we had. Unfortunately we did not keep enough of these players to cover the costs of the planets that were added.

1 Like

If Houchus goes I’ll quit and want a refund of my 10 years of gleamclub. (O.O) or am I reading that wrong hehehe Book For Dummies here “pointing at me”

3 Likes

The most logical thing for something like that is that they have a Dev post where people would vote on which planets to keep. For US East, I’d definitely vote for Houchous over Shedu Tier.

1 Like

I did some math in another thread and determined that sever costs are likely between $1,000 and $7,000 USD a month, but remember that those servers are also running the 300+ sov planets, which generate at least $3,000 monthly revenue assuming they are all the smallest size.

Can the servers even handle an influx of players? I would much rather see the playerbase grow than just “maintain”.

Phil had indicated the server costs for the public universe was in the low thousands per month. Unfortunately he was not more specific than that. That probably fits more with your high end total (including Sovereigns) than the low end. The public might be more expensive since they support more player instances than the sovereign planets .

Technically we had over 1000 players on the public planets simultaneously (this was long before sovereigns and I think even before exo-planets). I do think there were some issues with some planets being full, but how many I have no idea. I would think the existing public universe could handle more players than we have now, since it has done so in the past successfully. Maybe not over 1000 and everyone being happy but certainly more than we have now.

I do agree more players is better for the game. Hopefully more players is more gleam club and other revenue to support the game.

This was why I asked if it could even support it. I want the game to be more popular but if it can’t support a player base of more than 1000 the game will never be more than that sadly. I am talking about 50k+ players here.

With that large of a player base, revenue would most likely be a non-issue.

There is probably some number of concurrent players that could use the public planets without having issues. All I can assume is the number is between what we have now and the 1000+ Steam and PS players we had for the Steam free weekend. Now is that total players? Probably not. But I would hope that it is a number that could successfully fund the game

As long as the growth is at a moderate rate, the developers can always add more planets. If we got to 50k + players I wonder how many planets that would actually require? Several hundred at least I would think. I do think this size universe makes the game very different from what it is now. As an example, is there really one guild of players that could manage a portal network across so many planets?

As IIRC in posts the Devs never considered these large portal networks as an actual thing and these large networks posed issues for the game. I am guessing those issues were addressed.

I wouldn’t count gamers out though; they always find a way to make things happen.

This is all speculation, but the game deserves a larger player base, but if it can’t support it, that is quite sad.