Will Lag be the only winner? - Page 2

mikkyT · 2003-03-07, 07:10 AM

So then....why pay for the "massive" side of things?

Would DAoC ever be the same if the servers where limited to 100 players!? No!

100 player skirmishes forms part of the persistent multiplayer world on dedicated servers not some billybobs Linux box running a mickey mouse operation.

You will never ever see 1000 players fighting at the same time in teh same place, the world is too vast. By design.

You will only see battles with 100-200 players at a maximum (not fixed maximum but a logical maximum, people do have lives

)

But those battles, happening at the same time on different sides of the world then affect the tides of change accross the whole planet, with bases changing hands etc.

Like in DAoC where you had things to capture, just because you cannot see the battle(s) raging doesnt mean it wont affect you.

TimberWolf2K · 2003-03-07, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by mikkyT

You will only see battles with 100-200 players at a maximum (not fixed maximum but a logical maximum, people do have lives )

What are these "Lives" you speek of?

Miir · 2003-03-07, 08:23 AM

You will never ever see 1000 players fighting at the same time in teh same place, the world is too vast. By design.

I think there are still chances that you will see a large number of people fighting for a specific base or target. Perhaps not all the time but it's bound to happen.

PS = massive battles

That's what is appealing about it.

Can't wait till they release some larger scale battle footage to see how it handles.

MrVulcan · 2003-03-07, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by mikkyT
(not fixed maximum but a logical maximum, people do have lives )
..................................
Vulcan I think what hes trying to say is the screen lag on large scale encounters will be ridiculously high.

Life? wha???? But you post here too? How dare you try and be a gamer and have a life??? why why ..... its just wrong! The only life a gamer has is the number on the right side of his screen

......................................

Ya, but you have to understand that if you have the sys requirememnts it will run, just like many people are having major problems with C&C generals since they are running it on systems that couldnt run RA2 well, much less generals... Or having the min specs and playing it with all the effects on, you just cant do that.

I am sure that if you have the required system that it will be fine, and if you have the recomended system if will work in high rez and not have issues, regardless of how many polys and textures are on screen at one time.

Discordja · 2003-03-07, 10:06 AM

one of the dev team also noted they spent lots of time working on bases to compartmentalize (sp) them to limit the number of players on screen. this makes large battles more a large series of skirmishes which will help the fps issue. without lookin at their net code there's just know way to know how you'll do latency wise in those situations tho.

DarkDragon00 · 2003-03-07, 10:15 AM

Terran Elite Airborne Regiment

First off many of the FPSs are base on people runnig there own servers while they themselves play, there are a few places with Dedicated Servers and even those sometimes lag because u know after while they get old and mantainence must be performed. Such Things will not happened in PS because servers will be maintained and upgraded (hopefully) as demand grows. Plus these aren't just any old dedicated servers these are F*(kn huge servers that will have no problem handeling our seamingly weak connections! HOPE THIS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION!

-Dark- CO [TEAR]

Hamma · 2003-03-07, 11:40 AM

If they didnt think about lag in an MMO when they started this project, they would not have started it.

Miir · 2003-03-07, 12:18 PM

It's probably better not to compare PS servers with public run game servers, I totally agree it'll be way better than those. But I assume Mythic's - Dark Age of Camelot had pretty up-to-date servers and technology. But even on Mythic's servers 300-500 people in one spot (relic raids) equals lag and I didn't need to aim to kill someone. I'm picturing trying to actually aim and hit someone in lag comparable to DAoC lag, it would be ugly.

I agree, I'm sure PS dev team thought about lag... but everything looks good on paper. Every generation of MMORPG has had better technology and servers to work with. Yet every time you walk into a busy town you feel the strain of LAG. I don't suspect it will be any different with PS.

Basically I'm just wondering how bad it's going to be and if it's going to effect gameplay.

mikkyT · 2003-03-11, 04:05 AM

If your talking 300-500 people in one spot, thats a hell of a lot of polys to draw, and any system will have its choke points.

But the dev team have stated (I will get a link) that theres not likely to be 150 people visible on screen at once as you WILL experience teh grahpics lag as your system strains to cope NO MATTER what card or processor or memory you have, you will reach a choke point. Granted you may get more on screen at once but you will reach the point eventually.

The people might be there, but the system will only display a small number that it can see. that number of people in spot at once is still gonna look like a hell of a lot and it avoids the problems we see all too often in MMOGs. IMO it wont affect gameplay at all.

mikkyT · 2003-03-11, 04:16 AM

Im not explaining properly, I dont mean a coded hard maximum I mean with things like hills and buildings the game will not draw items it cannot see, so if there is a 300 player battle you are never likely to see all 300 people at once as they will be in buildings, behind hills. And we know the netcode wont even tell the client if it knows that a person or object is out of view.

NeoTassadar · 2003-03-11, 10:45 AM

No worries with broadband

Revulsion · 2003-03-11, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Hamma
If they didnt think about lag in an MMO when they started this project, they would not have started it.

Well said

FraBaktos · 2003-03-11, 11:31 AM

I used to play 128 player Tribes 2 battles, and I didn't get as much lag as you would think. Also, I play 64 player battlefield 1942 games and get absolutely no lag at all, even on the highest detail. I have a P4 2.4Ghz, 256MB DDR ram, Radeon 8500LE (I had hardware when I started playing T2 tho)

afex · 2003-03-11, 11:41 AM

dont say lag when you mean poor graphics performance.

it just confuses the newbies.

Pingpang · 2003-03-11, 12:03 PM

This is where having a tank certification comes in handy. If I can simply blow large groups of enemies up, there would be less people on the screen to give us lag