PS2 confirmed to only have servers in one area of USA - Page 13

**Malorn** · 2012-06-13, 01:02 AM

I somehow feel responsible for digging up the RadarX quote from a few weeks ago that started all this. Should have let that dragon lay.

Seems what we really need here is some clarity. Speculation has run wild. Once we have the actual facts we might be able to have a more meaningful discussion.

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:05 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Again, you're across an ocean. Difference between San Diego and Texas is a drop in the bucket at that point.

And you're right. There is no perfect solution. But there's a pretty good one in the middle of Texas.

I just ran some random tests:

San Diego 1 85ms 5Mbps
San Diego 2 11ms 30Mbps

Austin 145ms 27Mbps
Fort Worth 95ms 12Mbps

Richmond 103ms 5Mbps
Boston 98ms 16Mbps

So I can get bad ping and slow speed nearby. I can get worse ping in the middle of the country than on the opposite side.

These are literally just servers I picked at random for being where I am, halfway across the country, and all the way across the country. End result? No massive difference.

(Just as an additional note, I did Brisbane for a laugh after I posted, 211ms 5Mbps.)

Phellix · 2012-06-13, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

what does it been a free game have to do with somebody huffing and puffing about not playing? I'm not seeing the connection. you might have an agrument if it was B2P and they already have your money, but been F2P they want you to continue to play, people arnt going to continue to play if the experience is shit.

My point is it's a free game and the money they'll be getting from players is from people who continue to play, you're right, but what you missed was that they've already considered the possibility of losing players because they can't deal with a "150 ping" .30 delay.

I'm in LA and pinged 87 to new york, 88 in alaska, and 175 in france, i've played almost every FPS out there on not just US but EU servers as well(mainly for better modded servers) and the difference really isn't that noticeable. We don't even know what their decisions are, this thread should honestly be frozen until beta when people realize SOE has already taken this into account.

Edit: Also maybe the thread title should be changed because it's not confirmed, really misleading.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-13, 01:14 AM

I did a quick speedtest.net go at a few locations. I live in Seattle.

Seattle 5ms
San Diego 45ms
Dallas 55ms
New York City 76ms
Miami 75ms

London 155ms
Berlin 195ms
Melbourne 195ms
Sydney 195ms

EU/AU was a wash about the same.

Difference between east coast and west coast was 30ms.

Clearly that 30 ms calls for two different datacenters!

So much exaggeration on this thread it's ridiculous.

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Difference between east coast and west coast was 30ms.

Clearly that 30 ms calls for two different datacenters!

So much exaggeration on this thread it's ridiculous.

Can you at least admit that coupled with what I already posted maybe it's silly to say that we really need it to be in Texas? (Let's assume it will cost more money . . . is that money really worth the *maybe* better ping for some people on the east coast and central and worse for other locations?)

**Malorn** · 2012-06-13, 01:21 AM

I think you need more tests to determine that. Seattle is probably fairly well plugged into the series of tubes.

Though it doesn't seem to much matter whether it is east, west, or central, so hosting where it is most convenient/cheapest for SOE makes sense. Having the servers right with the devs seems like a good idea. You know if there's a problem they can walk over and kick it a few times. Seems like patches would go faster also when you aren't working remotely.

But last I remember San Diego had rolling brownouts, so maybe not the best place for servers. Or have they solved that whole SoCal power problem by now?

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by elfailo

Yeah because routing is always the same regardless of where the signal is coming from.

...

From Amsterdam:
100ms to Boston and NY.
177ms to Palo Alto and San diego.

So you're a Euro whose regional datacenters will likely be in Germany complaining that the US servers will be in San Diego?

Ah well, I am likely playing on an EU server anyway since my outfit is primarily EU. Amazingly enough I will not be crying that my ping is too high and I can't play . . .

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:24 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

But last I remember San Diego had rolling brownouts, so maybe not the best place for servers. Or have they solved that whole SoCal power problem by now?

Uh, they don't cut power to major datacenters, or those datacenters all have backups. When was the last time you heard of EQ, EQ2, or any other game going down for poweroutages?

I have no idea if the one that took out ALL of SoCal (that was a blackout) took them down, but that can happen ANYWHERE in the world. Including Texas.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-13, 01:25 AM

Originally Posted by elfailo

Yeah because routing is always the same regardless of where the signal is coming from.

...

From Amsterdam:
100ms to Boston and NY.
177ms to Palo Alto and San diego.

Pardon me for being a callous American ass, but what's your ping to the Euro servers?

Frankly I don't care if the euros want to play on American servers (we are awesome afterall), but they should be optimizing North American servers for people who play in North America.

And if you're in North America, the server location doesn't seem to make a lick of difference anymore. From my location to Miami is nearly the longest distance across the continental US and it's only a 30ms difference from San Diego.

Crazy thought I know. North Americans playing on North American servers. Where do I get this stuff?

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:33 AM

On the brown/blackout . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling...#United_States

Funnily enough, Texas is right in there with California.

Phellix · 2012-06-13, 01:34 AM

Originally Posted by elfailo

From Amsterdam:

Welp, i'm done here.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-13, 01:43 AM

I'd prefer not splitting the north American player base on time zone just so a few random euros that want to play on US servers get the best possible pings.

For a north American server, euro pings are obviously no the priority. Nor should they be.

Phellix · 2012-06-13, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by elfailo

I pinged 15ms on Werner because Werner was in Amsterdam. On German Pro-Sieben server I will probably ping about 30-45ms. Pinged 100ms on Emerald (NY) and 180ms on Markov (SD).

I still play with AC and we now have some more European players as well. East Coast would just be much better for everyone because of that. There are plenty of clans that also comprise EU and US players. WoW bridged that gap even more than Planetside 1 did.

We're talking about the benefits of having multiple server clusters vs. a single cluster. Multiple clusters would obviously also be better for US players, because they can then choose between East and West. It could mean the difference between 100ms and 20ms. I actually pinged lower on Emerald than some Americans, because it was very close to the North Atlantic pipeline, allowing me to skip most of the messed up inland US infrastructure and routing.

Not to sound like an ass here but what your asking for is for NA servers to cater to EU players, and I can understand that clans want to play together, nothings stopping them still. BUT it's not really fair to ask that because as a west coaster there's nothing you can do about my ping to EU, because well that's just how the internet works. Sometimes you just gotta deal, or at the very least figure out how many NA/EU players you have and decide together whether or not choosing a EU server would benefit your clan more based on your NA members locations.

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by elfailo

I pinged 15ms on Werner because Werner was in Amsterdam. On German Pro-Sieben server I will probably ping about 30-45ms. Pinged 100ms on Emerald (NY) and 180ms on Markov (SD).

I played on Werner from Amsterdam. I played on some US server (can't remember which one, sorry, Werner was where I spent most of my playtime) from Amsterdam. I played on whatever US server that was from San Diego as well.

It made no difference to my gameplay. None. Each time it was PlanetSide. Each time I got killed by people and killed people. Each time I got the drop on folks, or they got the drop on me.

But like I've already said earlier in the thread, I don't constantly seek excuses for why I died or didn't score a killshot. I simply keep playing. I am convinced that a lot of people look at ping as some kind of excuse for why they are playing badly. I can tell you from the days of playing at 450-500 ping on dialup, these kind of ping times don't matter nearly as much as people want them to . . .

(True story, someone in an MW3 game I was playing in complained that X person was getting all their kills because their ping was lower than everyone else's . . . it was 40, the guy complaining had a 55 . . .)

Karmic Revenge · 2012-06-13, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

I'd prefer not splitting the north American player base on time zone just so a few random euros that want to play on US servers get the best possible pings.

My feeling is that I'd prefer servers be global. 24/7 mayhem.

We are apparently not yet at that point. Maybe when PS3 comes out.