| 79 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Have you considered that in your Halo 3 (or in general, split-screen games), all players basically stay in the same location/level ? How do you enforce that in an MMO ? If two players playing on the same screen can be in a different area of the world, your computer would have to stream/keep in memory different areas/assets at once. Technically, it'd be a nightmare to implement, and you'd be the first to complain about bugs.. |
|
|
How does EVE handle so many players on at the same time?
Jita (General) « EVE Online 2/06/10 8:02:02 PM
Message deleted. |
|
|
Infinity has a procedural universe with seamless planets on which you can land. It is not instanced, owning settlements/stations/cities for player corps is planned; however it won't have avatar/walking at release. |
|
Why would you limit 100% of the user's functionality when it's a large minority (0.001%, for example) that has got an issue ? They are very vocal on STO's forum, but that's expected; meanwhile the masses are playing the game, so we don't know the exact numbers. I'm not denying that there is a problem. It's not directly STO's fault, is all I'm saying. A game's code isn't a well defined block that calls few well-defined functions in DirectX. Just rendering to a single, simple texture may require dozens of function calls. A game's renderer is a collection of thousands and thousands of function calls, features, that all interact with each other. So it's not hard to understand that each piece of software/game will stress the hardware in a very different way. I mentionned STO's menu because I experienced it myself; I launched fraps and saw that it ran at 1500 fps. This means that it probably has little CPU activity, and since it's a menu, little geometry. But due to the menu's visual effects, probably a lot of fillrate/bandwidth activity, for example caused by blending operations. It may not look like Crysis, but it doesn't matter. If it uses half of Crysis resources per frame but runs twice as fast, then it will have the same load than Crysis, although I'm over-simplifying my explanations a bit. |
|
In this particular case, it doesn't matter what the game looks like, because the overheating issue is mostly caused by the login screen/menu system: it runs at 1500 fps. It is optimized, and that's exactly because it runs fast without a pause that it causes overheating. Of course, adding a pause to avoid overheating issues would mean that performance would drop for everybody (including people who don't have any problem!). |
|
|
Coincidentally, I play a science officer.. |
|
Originally posted by Elikal I see what you're talking of. I'm currently blocked on that mission. First time in the game that I'm stuck. I'm not sure how others have passed it. That's a single, big badass ship. I'm doing everything in the book of the good space commander: using evasive maneuvers, quick shields recharge, all the time moving my ship to present a side where shields are stronger, items bufs, placing my ship to use the two phaser arrays at 240° at the same time, etc.. I'm a Lt. Lvl 6. Usually, I can hold for a while, but sometimes the Gorn hostage ship will suddenly throw a blue laser ( forgot its name ) at me, that will annihilate my shields in a few seconds. I don't have time to do anything, really. Then sometimes it will throw 4 or 5 torpedos in a burst, it doesn't matter if I have 100% shields or not, my ship is instantly destroyed. The only thing I can think of is to put that mission on hold and retry it later. |
|
|
I'm giving it a B- but that's assuming a polished, bug-free, lag-free version ( hopefully by release ) with more content. Anybody expecting a sandbox, immersive universe will be disapointed. If you don't have too high expectations and take the game for what it is, it can be fun for a while. I wouldn't play it for more than a few months, but until it lasts, I'd have fun. The game mechanics are pretty classic ( including the grinding ) and the instancing / loading screens are disapointing. The space combat is easily the best part, although a bit repetitive, but it doesn't bore me to death like Eve did. It has a good balance of twitch ( controling your ship directly ) and tactics. |
|
|
Item Shops - They Need to Die Out for the sake of MMO's
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 12/12/09 7:21:17 AM
Originally posted by qombi And you need to quit telling people what they should like and what they shouldn't. I don't like item shop games because I feel after that point you no longer are playing a game. Instead what you have is a virtual store at that point. To me it goes against everything that PC rpg games are. Buying virtual items with real life cash removes you from the rpg world you are in into the real world which ruins immersion. Not only that buying items for cash is everything a PC rpg game isn't. Items obtained in games are obtained through gameplay means. Why buy items? That isn't gaming that is playing dress up. Anyhow thanks for spewing out your garbage of a post and assuming you know why people don't want item shops. I would pay more of a sub fee before I played a game with an item shop. Yah poor devs can't feed their families, I think WoW has reported record profits and it added an item shop. They are really hurting. Only we can determine how much a company can milk out of of us. I don't support item shops because I don't feel they belong in video games, I could care less what you think about it. I vote with my money. Huh ? Where did I tell people what they're supposed to like or not ? Have you read my post at all ? All I'm saying is that if you're going on a crusade against capitalism and companies greed, there are much better targets than a video game. I never said that item shops were good, and I certainly never said that I knew why people wanted item shops. In fact, your reply makes no sense to me, to be honest.. |
|
|
Item Shops - They Need to Die Out for the sake of MMO's
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 12/11/09 7:22:07 PM
I find this thread, and all the "omg, companies are greedy !" thing.. incredible. It's almost if some players _demand_ that developers make games for fun only, and if they can feed their family, well that's good luck, a nice superflous extra ! Meanwhile, I wonder how many of them are posting on other forums about shops such as Walmarts making outrageous margins on food.. and the 1001 other companies that they pay every day without questions asked.. You. Need. To. Revise. Your. Priorities. |
|
|
Well, the fact that the company's income would be reduced is a pretty big negative for them, don't you think ? Because that's what you get if you cap the fee, as all players are paying less or equal than before. The current fee system is "balanced": casual players are more or less paying for the costs induced by hardcore players. |
|
|
Can't you simple ban the whole proxy's IP range ? Yeah, that will also block innocent people using that same proxy, but if they're using a proxy in the first place, they're maybe not that innocent ? That's a small price to pay to get ride of that no-life idiot. |
|
Originally posted by Yamota So I play an MMORPG to play a single player storyline? Awesome, then why play it as an MMORPG then? Fail! The storyline is only an aspect of the game; nobody forces you to follow it if you're not interested in it. Or is your point that a MMO without a story is better ? In addition, the storyline is multiplayer. That's the difference with a single player game. Players can compete or collaborate to achieve the goals. Let me give you an example: imagine that there are tensions between two planets A and B. Depending on what players do in-game, for example pirating NPC ships trading between A and B, they could trigger a war between those two planets, in which players could in turn participate. This means that the game world evolves depending on player's actions. |
|
Originally posted by spinach8puff And what if your bait was polluting the river ? Because that's exactly the problem here, and why so many people are against it. Cheating in a solo game ? That's your choice. Cheating in a multi game ? You're negatively affecting others. |
|
|
Yeah, plus a whole week of waiting time, can you imagine ? That's totally unacceptable. How slow and non-reactive they are, they're clearly incompetent, let's get them all fired ! /sarcasm off
|
|
Originally posted by Ilvaldyr I can see the logic in the first part of this statement, but I can't agree with the highlighted part. I don't see queues as being a reasonable solution to the problem; not in 2009. With all the advances in networking and such in the past 10 years, there should be a less obstructive method of dealing with the problem, i.e. one that doesn't completely prevent one from playing the game. There's this strange thing of players *demanding* that new servers are opened within the day, else it's the end of the world. /sarcasm mode on Of course, everybody knows that acquiring a new server, installing and configuring software on it, tuning the parameters for better performance, synchronizing all the servers between each other, can be done in a few minutes. In fact, a student could do it. It's common sense, isn't it ? /sarcasm mode off Preparing more servers for the initial rush ? How do you decide how many servers are needed for that ? You can only do rough estimations, for example how do you estimate how many hours a player will stay logged on in average ? There are dozens of unknown factors, and developers don't have a crystal ball. The overhead would cost a lot more to the company too, so financially it wouldn't be a good operation. After the dust settles, players still won't be happy. Server merges ? Have fun with the complaints, between "they're already merging servers, epic fail", "my friends/clan members ended up on a different server", "I now have bad latency", "poor design", etc.. And following the student's rule, everybody knows that merging servers is free and takes no effort. If you haven't understood yet, I'm of the opinion that, yes, server queues are bad.. but they're the lesser of the two evil.. The only thing that I'd like to see changed from the way the company's handling the problem, is to add a few days of free play time to those that can't connect or have waited for many hours in the queue.
|
|
|
Do we have to expect to be nerfed in any mmo?
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 9/08/09 6:20:38 AM
I have a funny theory: players wouldn't complain as much if classes were never nerfed, but buffed individually, and nerfed as a whole equally. Let me explain: imagine the scenario where you have 3 classes: Warrior, Mage and Paladin. Mage is overpowered, Warrior is fine, Paladin is too weak. Now imagine that in a first step, developers buffed the Paladin class a lot and buffed the Warrior class a little bit. As a result, the three classes are now roughly balanced. But this obviously leads to inflation. Now imagine that in a second step, maybe months later, ALL classes at the same time get hit by the nerf bat equally, to cancel the inflation problem. For example, all classes do X% less damage, or have X% less hitpoints/manapoints. In the end, the result would be similar to achieving balance by tweaking classes individually ( nerfing some, buffing others ), except that now I suspect players would consider it to be fair... |
|
|
Dear Dana, I hate to break it to anyone running a competitor, or developing “the next big thing,” but your game is likely not in the same field as WoW. So, I ask, why the heck do you insist on charging the same price? Your argument makes sense when you look at it from the player's perspective. But when you put yourself in the shoes of the developer, does it still hold ? So the main question I would like to ask you is, do you think the per-player-cost that the developer has to pay monthly is lower for indies than for Blizzard ? Do you think bandwidth is less expensive for indies ? Do you think the bandwidth a player consumes when playing is lower than in WoW ? Do you think the server resources the player consumes ( % of cpu, % of ram ) is lower ? Do you think the player needs less attention from customer support/representatives ? Do you think the game needs less maintenance/patches than an AAA title ? Do you think the processing fees/taxes through third-parties are smaller ? Remember, I'm talking of the per-player monthly expenses, not the total cost for everybody, which of course will be much higher when you have millions of players. Chances are, you've answered no to those questions. At best you're paying the same price, at worse you don't get the same deals and pay even more. So when you ask "why do indy developers insist on charging the same price ?", maybe the answer simply is: "because they can't afford to reduce it or they'd loose money" ?
|
|
|
DF Forum Mods Delete 300 post thread regarding NA publisher
General Discussion « Darkfall 7/16/09 8:22:53 AM
Without taking side on who's right or who's wrong, I'll only remark that I indeed could not locate the aforementionned thread either, and I tried various strings and even a search on the poster name. So it indeed looks like it has been deleted. |
|
|
Garriott says he was forced out by NCsoft
The Pub at MMORPG.COM « General Discussion 5/09/09 6:09:12 PM
You guys should really read the complaint instead of throwing accusations at RG without knowing what you're speaking of. No, RG did not write this open letter announcing his departure. NCSoft did. RG was still in quarantine in Russia when this happened. He merely approved it at the time, unaware that his departure was deemed as "voluntary" by NCSoft. If he had known, he wouldn't have approved it, that's the whole point of the complaint ! Geez, I don't even know why I explain that, the few people who have truely read the complaint and understand the issue are a minority, flooded by the "RG said he left, so he has no case" posts.. |
|
