PS2 confirmed to only have servers in one area of USA - Page 7

Sifer2 · 2012-06-12, 08:54 PM

Got to love the step backwards gaming keeps seeming to take in regards to multiplayer. Most games don't support LAN anymore. And now we can't even have servers for West,Central,East? Really? Christ.

Revanmug · 2012-06-12, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by Karmic Revenge

For the record those of us in San Diego would like you to know that we, as a general rule have VERY good connections to other locations throughout the country and the world. That means that the reverse is also true.

An interesting note, one reason San Diego HAS such good internet is in fact the massive push Sony made in 1999 when EverQuest went live. They had nowhere near enough capacity for such a successful game and they immediately started getting massive infrastructure laid out as a result.

Stop treating it like San Diego is some backwater hole with no net. It's got major connections (multiple!!) through LA (ooooo, one tiny little hop to one of the largest hubs in the world, oh noes . . .) and has been host to plenty of sites and services for years.

In addition, I have played on US servers from Europe (worse ping in most cases than across the US) in all manner of games and have had no issue adjusting to latency. (My worst internet experiences in recent times have been Battle.net ones, and those are all supposedly done in datacenters close to the individual user!)

I'm not sure you are even worth responding... Hello, is there something in that brain? The idea is to spread the server rather than place 1 big center which is at one extremity of the US.

Guess what... there are other people than you on this continent and you know what is even more shocking... They might want to play without lagging since they aren't living next to you.

I'm quite happy you like your Lag when playing on europeen server. My standard for fps are higher though and it seems I ain't the only one. You got a problem with that?

Shade Millith · 2012-06-12, 09:04 PM

As an Australian, all I can say is -

"HAH HAH HAH, you're whinging about 150 ping? Seriously? Please excuse me, HAH!"

kaffis · 2012-06-12, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by Bags

PS eltroc/kaffis I dunno about anyone else but I stopped listening to you guys when you started being rude, so maybe if you stopped that people would read your posts.

Just a thought.

Meh. I wasn't intending to come off rude (though, I can see how it could be read that way, now that I look at it). I was aiming for a lighthearted comment to point out that nobody was listening to him in the first place, and repeating himself more doesn't help.

Also, that was my first post on the matter, and it was pretty apparent that people stopped/didn't start listening to him before he "got rude" if you want to call it that, so it doesn't exactly seem like that's what's at work.

And SkyExile, Electrofreak was entirely talking movement and hit detection, which, by sheer volume of data and the desire to have it as low latency as possible, just doesn't end up being handled with TCP because the protocol overhead and requisite acks and segment ordering just add to the latency from the actual application's perspective. Would cooldown abilities require acknowledgement from the server? Yeah, they would, and nobody's said anything to the contrary. Jitter happens with TCP and UDP alike, TCP just does segment ordering to account for it, which slows the conversation down, as it were.

Goku · 2012-06-12, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by Shade Millith

As an Australian, all I can say is -

"HAH HAH HAH, you're whinging about 150 ping? Seriously? Please excuse me, HAH!"

Sorry, but I live in a country where I shouldn't have to worry about such pings.

SKYeXile · 2012-06-12, 09:12 PM

Kaffis read the posts again. Don't waste time replying again though.

Arovien · 2012-06-12, 09:13 PM

Really hope they don't go through with this HORRIBLE idea, unless they wanna piss off over 90% of their potential customers.

Tallon · 2012-06-12, 09:16 PM

<facepalm> one server....ONE bwahahahahahaha PS2 is gunna nosedive if they do this

Zolan · 2012-06-12, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by Tallon

<facepalm> one server....ONE bwahahahahahaha PS2 is gunna nosedive if they do this

One server location in the U.S.A. not one server.

Revanmug · 2012-06-12, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by Tallon

<facepalm> one server....ONE bwahahahahahaha PS2 is gunna nosedive if they do this

They won't have 1 server for sure. They are trying to centralise every US server (aka, every australien, US, Canadian, etc. players) to 1 specific place rather than spread them out to the usual west and east coast.

This is nothing more but a way of reducing $cost$ at the expense of playability for players that aren't exactly close to the server center.

Xyntech · 2012-06-12, 09:33 PM

Well they are going to have more than one North American server as well. 6000 people per server won't be enough to handle the players with just one server, not by a long shot.

Considering that it's F2P and I could easily see them needing 10 to 20+ servers for NA alone, it seems pretty silly to put them all in the same place.

Tarconus · 2012-06-12, 09:37 PM

Bad idea very bad, ping will have an effect on your game. You will die before you even knew what hit you with a high ping, every single shooter is this way. There is no way they came up with a magic bullet to say pings in shooters don't matter anymore.

Maybe the lag input the one person had while playing the game is whats going to happen to everyone that's how they are going to fix it just make everyone's ping artificially higher.

Even if I have a good ping(I am close by seattle) I still think they need east coast servers hell even central servers. Dumbest idea ever to say that ping won't matter and it's all going to be in one location.

It's just like in driving your reaction time gets added on to how quickly you see something so someone that sees something 1/4 second before you will have reacted before your brain even sent the signal to your finger to pull the trigger.

That even gets worse with age, so all you older vets, and by older that means over 25 when your reaction time starts to slow, you should really want more options with lower pings so that you don't have players with that much of an advantage on you that they may already have.

Phellix · 2012-06-12, 09:42 PM

Originally Posted by Tarconus

Bad idea very bad, ping will have an effect on your game. You will die before you even knew what hit you with a high ping, every single shooter is this way. There is no way they came up with a magic bullet to say pings in shooters don't matter anymore.

Maybe the lag input the one person had while playing the game is whats going to happen to everyone that's how they are going to fix it just make everyone's ping artificially higher.

Even if I have a good ping(I am close by seattle) I still think they need east coast servers hell even central servers. Dumbest idea ever to say that ping won't matter and it's all going to be in one location.

It's just like in driving your reaction time gets added on to how quickly you see something so someone that sees something 1/4 second before you will have reacted before your brain even sent the signal to your finger to pull the trigger.

That even gets worse with age, so all you older vets, and by older that means over 25 when your reaction time starts to slow, you should really want more options with lower pings so that you don't have players with that much of an advantage on you that they may already have.

I don't even..

Tarconus · 2012-06-12, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by Phellix

I don't even..

Don't even... ? what you don't have an argument? I am turning 30 this year I already know my reaction time is no where near when I was 16.

RNFB · 2012-06-12, 09:49 PM

San Diego is literally the furthest point in America from my location up here in Canada. I'm going to be seriously pissed if I have to play with 200+ ping.