Minecraft PC IP: play.cubecraft.net
Status
Not open for further replies.

HackersDontWin

🎥 Content Creator 🎥
🎥 Content Creator
Hello! Quick disclaimer for everyone before you read this thread: Although I'm a moderator I am making this suggestion from a partner's point of view. I am making this thread since I was told by CubeCraft to "make a suggestion about it".

So as you all know CubeCraft staff and partners (people with the YT rank) have access to create private games. Myself and other partners have been using this private game system a lot and it's helping us a lot in creating interesting content. I myself use this feature during my livestreams to create private eggwars/skywars games so I have a closer connection to my viewers which we all enjoy.

With the private game system you get a set of commands that the owner can use to control the game (for example: kick, forcestart & stop). There was also another command which allowed us to give someone else the private game ownership. The private game will stay online as long as the owner of the game is still there but as soon as they leave the game will automatically close down. I'll divide this suggestion in 2 parts so you all understand what this suggestion is about.

The problem
Recently the permission to use the command which gives someone else the private game ownership was removed due to "abuse". With this change the private game owner has to stay in the game until the end if they don't want it to shutdown which creates a problem for me & other content creators where if we were to start a private game for viewers and get eliminated at the start of the game we are forced to keep spectating until the game is done unless we want to encounter backlash from our own viewers that we're playing with (I myself have already tried this and I get around 40 people being mad at me for doing what CubeCraft has suggested me to do: leave the game and join another one). Another issue that comes with this is that I spend more time spectating than actually playing (the worst case scenario I've had yet is spectating for 40 minutes in a 80 minute game, which is hard to make interesting content on).


The Solution
In short words, reinstate the command to give someone else the private game ownership so we (partners) can continue to make content on CubeCraft while playing with viewers (the community). If someone were to abuse the command instead of removing the permissions for everyone they should message the abuser and give them a warning or remove the permission of that person to start private games entirely.

FAQ

Why not force everyone to finish the game? Why not have personal rules in the private game so you don't get eliminated?
This is actually something that is already done. Rules like "You have to be at middle", "You cannot leave middle", etc. are already put in place to try and make the game shorter. Even when doing this, the game lasts an excessive amount of time. As for adding a rule to not eliminate me, this will seem like I would be forcing people to die to me which isn't what we want either.

Why not limit the armour of each player?
Organizing such rules is very difficult, especially since you can't be 100% certain that everyone will follow them. I've tried setting a rule "You cannot shop" but people did it regardless and most likely will continue to do so whenever given the chance.
 
Jul 3, 2016
820
1,894
308
20
Andromeda
Totally agree to this suggestion, the command was very useful for content creators in order to interact with your viewers, specially if the person had to leave the game for several reasons but didn't want to ruin the viewers' gameplay.
 

Ardaaaa

Member
Mar 31, 2020
185
299
79
I agree with this thread, the command was so useful for you and other content creators :D
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Nuvoh

Camezonda

🏳️‍🌈
Team CubeCraft
💙 Admin Team
Jul 23, 2015
6,119
6,990
573
22
Isle of Cats
twitter.com
Hey Hackers,

Thanks for making this suggestion. As some of our developers and yourself have previously mentioned, the function to set owner was removed to prevent non-staff/partner users from controlling the private game and asking staff/partners to get a private game for themselves. The command wasn't meant to be released to the main network; it was used by our developers when testing the system.

Sadly, your solution doesn't resolve the issue for which the command was removed for, and introduces more things that need maintaining. Some users would potentially harass staff for private games as they did previously. And needing to warn users for abusing private games is another thing that moderators would need to be responsible for, along with the private game system wouldn't support removing access for specific users at this time. Which again, if it were possible, it would be another thing that developers would need to develop or be responsible for. Private games were given to staff/partners as something special they can use for the time being rather than the system just sitting there waiting for other parts of the infrastructure to be improved before being publicly released.

At this point in time, we're not going to be adding the command back, and resources will be put onto other parts of the network. When private games are released publicly, we will most likely add the command for staff & partners only & allow them to have more than one private game active. This isn't something that non-staff/partners can have due to abuse and poor use of network resources.

Thanks, Cam.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Members Online

Team Online

Latest profile posts

AlexpYT192 wrote on Capitan's profile.
QUIEN ES EL IMPOSTOR.PNG


hay un impostor entre nosotros
Dutchyyy wrote on Stitchieee's profile.
Happy birthday!
-pokemondjs7- wrote on driima's profile.
Light mode or dark mode?
-pokemondjs7- wrote on Organic's profile.
Name change?
-pokemondjs7- wrote on TnAdan_'s profile.
What games do you play on Cube?
Top Bottom