Remix.run Logo
ecshafer 5 hours ago

Wow Teamspeak is still around and looks like they are succeeding again. Teamspeak and Ventrilo used to be such a mainstay of the video game community. I was curious why so many younger people were getting Discords instead of starting up Vent or Teamspeak servers like we used to. It does look like Teamspeak has taken a note out of discord and slacks notebook and have gotten more advanced chat room options now.

miki123211 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Many reasons:

1. To DeDoS a Teamspeak server, it's enough to DeDoS a single server. You may not even need to do that, it may be enough to be such a nuisance that their host kicks them out. To DeDoS a Discord server, it's necessary to DeDoS the entirety of Discord, which is much, much harder, and also much more likely to put you in legal hot water. Discord is the Cloudflare of gaming.

2. Discord servers aren't real servers, they're tenants in an application, effectively "rows in an SQL table", not standalone containers requiring their own tech stack. This means they can be offered for free. You also can't abuse them for E.G. crypto mining, like you can with a VPS where a Teamspeak server can be hosted. Free increases adoption, which makes people a lot more likely to pay for extra features. It's the standard "the rich subsidize the poor" model, common to so many web applications.

3. No technical expertise necessary to set a server up. Bus factor is basically equal to infinity.

4. One service, one account, one interface, many servers, many groups, many people. There's no weird workspace switching and per-workspace DMs like in Slack (not sure how TS does this). If you log in once on a new device, all your server memberships are there, and everything just works. You may be in dozens of servers, and they're all behind the same single login.

Those 4 features are table stakes now, like it or not. If you want to be a real, long-term Discord competitor and attract real users, you have to figure out how to get those 4.

qmarchi a minute ago | parent | next [-]

Ooh, this is fun.

1. Yes and no. Discord "guilds" have their metadata and chat messages managed by a single shard somewhere in GCP. However, voice is managed using servers hosted by ID3, a much smaller provider. If you find the right websocket server you can repeatedly take down voice instances still.

2. Emojis are just lines in a database, and yet they still charge a fee for that. The reason why it's free is because that's the selling point. Also, each "server" is actually part of a sharded container that manages the write-lock for the data in that "server".

The whole tangent here feels weird since I _choose_ what to run on "my" VPS. Noisy neighbors have been a solved problem for decades.

3. This is actually the killer feature, centralization sells because of network effects. You're only on Discord because your friends are on Discord.

4. Teamspeak has this with myTeamspeak now. You've been able to have multiple sessions for a long time, but now it's in a nicer interface.

ericd 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Were people really ddos'ing teamspeak servers? What does anyone gain from that?

Novosell 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's DDoS. No e.

general_reveal 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn’t solving cost effective voice hosting the only issue here? I’d compete if I could affordably scale rooms.

Aurornis 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I was curious why so many younger people were getting Discords instead of starting up Vent or Teamspeak servers like we used to.

Discord did a great job of making it easy and free to get all of your friends into a group together. Everything just works. You don’t need to have an IT person in the group to set up the server and walk everyone through connecting.

In the early days of gaming it seemed like every gaming group had at least one person who worked in tech and didn’t mind setting up a server. Now gaming is mainstream and the average gaming group doesn’t have a person who can host a server for them. Even when they do, that person would rather spend their gaming time on playing the games instead of playing the IT person for the group.

m4rtink 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Its just works to get your groups of friends together - up until the point the damned thing starts to asking them "papers please!" a they start leaving.

zadikian 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah and even some of us IT people weren't enough into video games to care about hosting voice chat. Like I ran the middle school Minecraft server but not a Teamspeak for it.

nehal3m 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As that IT person I’ve set up a few alternatives over the years (and they’re still up, certs and all). Matrix stuck with a decent group of people, but the group I hung out on Discord with refused to move. I definitively bailed after the ID news but the guys didn’t follow (to Matrix, or Jitsi, or TeamSpeak, or Mumble).

I’m kind of salty about making a fruitless effort I’ll admit, but I feel like unless there’s an effortless, perfect, free program that replicates the (voice) channel functionality and screen sharing features people are not going to leave Discord. Even if it does treat its users like shit.

I miss those guys but I refuse to take part in that abuse, and I’m angry about it.

ndiddy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It looks like Teamspeak covers the "group of friends who voice chat each other" use case (Discord DM groups) but not the "IRC replacement" use case (Discord servers). As far as I can tell, the licensing for Teamspeak 6 (the version that tries to be competitive with Discord) is set up such that anybody who joins the server (as opposed to anybody actively using it) uses up a slot, so the licensing fees for larger servers would be cost prohibitive. Additionally, the text chat functionality is way worse than on Discord. There's no way to just have a chat channel, you can only view and use the text chat when you're in a voice call in a voice channel.

httpsterio an hour ago | parent [-]

Server admin can set the voice privileges on a channel basis, limiting effectively channels to text only.

Longlius an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Discord offered more features. Voice chat was part of the initial sell for the platform, but these days most users don't even use the voice functionality and instead use it for long-running hypermedia chats with retained history.

m4rtink 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the main reason was Discord basically doumping free server hosting with VC money to eliminate competition.

Now that money has finally run out, it looks like things are reverting back to normal.

SchemaLoad an hour ago | parent [-]

Has the money run out? I still have yet to spend a single dollar on discord.

m4rtink 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

Reportedly they are plan in IPO & the latest identity verification crap they are pushing seems to be related.

So yes, it looks like the money has run out and rather than pushing for direct monetization they try to turn to shadier stuff - get as much personal data as possible to either make the company look juicier for either an IPO or an acquisition.

zadikian 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Because a Discord server is very easy and free to set up, and has nice features like screensharing that weren't commonly handled well at the time. Before that, we used Skype or AIM or iChat if we even wanted audio at all; Teamspeak was more for "serious gamers."