The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
You programmers have it so easy
Comfy chair and a kettle? Luxury!
Try being stuck in a hardware clean room for a working day - with the nasty lights, constant hvac noise, bootie covers, grounding wires, no chance to go outside on a break, and you have to troubleshoot some pointless PCB against the wrong test data
done that. And when you do get caught up production gets because you are standing around. So you go hid behind the tools, and read the million and a half emails you have gotten about spec changing that does not matter to you but have to sign off on as reading.
Check my glossary, look for "sort of©" definition.
I might print that out and keep it handy...
If only it was just a server/network problem... How many tens of thousands of polygons characters and hundreds of thousands of polygons ships, with slightly lighter dozens of npc and their ships on top of that, with fidelicious physical interaction, with never seen before space or planet surface, could handle the mid-range or high-range computer?
Last edited:
I'm assuming "...times it by 8" probably refers to number of cores or number of threads per core, certainly not very clear though.
If they want to fantasize about threads and cores and possibilities why don't they buy some Oracle M6-32s where they can run 192 cores for 3072 threads per machine.
Well Oracle (Sun) are pretty good at what they do - but when it comes to big iron they are a bit rubbish
Great for largescale - but that's not the same thing.As I understand it, you're in an instance of one, but that then shares data at the server end with other instances within your in-game view range (They have pretty hefty server farms)
Or possibly witchcraft.
Actually, it's probably witchcraft.
Hmmm. Yes, I see. (nods sagely)
Aren't you glad you asked?
OK, try "lots of expensive computers and nerd magic". Expensive being a key bit: PS2 is basically pay-to-win, and if SC goes down that route (any further than it already has) I'm not touching it with a bargepole even if they do make the blasted thing.
So that is 24 or 40 People per SERVER ? But that server is running 8 Instances ? So there are 3 or 5 players per instance ?
So am I right in thinking that the TL : DW is "We over-promised and under-delivered for something we charged money for, again".
A bit harsh.
A lot of devs working without sleep eventually get pulled from one demo to work on the other. It's quite an interesting watch and you get to see the amount of daft decoration in the offices.
So how do they crew the big ships?
With regards to networking, interestingly we are on the verge of having tech that allows many physics based players and persistent objects in games. Bossa Studies are making World's Adrift on top off SpatialOS, which is one such technology.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/improbable-spatialos-simulated-cities
Obviously something being doable means little in the context of SC until we see things actually implemented.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/improbable-spatialos-simulated-cities
Obviously something being doable means little in the context of SC until we see things actually implemented.
AFAICT they are handling 24 people per Arena Commander instance, and that's all they say about AC. They are handling 40 people per Arc Corp instance, but Arc Corp is currently divided geographically into 8 instances.
What they are discussing is, for Arc Corp (which isn't very lag sensitive), increasing the pop-cap by using a different instancing system. I'm not sure if the exact mechanism discussed makes sense, but it is common for MMOs to do something somewhat similar in high traffic area (the server only sends the details on characters "close" to you, which has a bunch of positive/negative effects).
The elephant in the room for SC is that you almost certainly can't render 100 characters at the same time with that level of fidelity/avatar customization/animation anyway. So having 10,000 characters per instance is perhaps a rather academic point.
Ah .... that sounds better. Thanks for clearing that up ... I have to admit even with the High Fidelity Refactoring taken in to account, 3 or 5 players per instance seemed low.
OK so if I tone down the harsh a bit, "They couldn't even get a demo finished for their own backer financed event planned one year in advance, despite their sleep deprived employee's making sacrifices to the detriment of their families".
What's the TOS like for citcon, can the ticket-holders get a refund ?.
With regards to networking, interestingly we are on the verge of having tech that allows many physics based players and persistent objects in games. Bossa Studies are making World's Adrift on top off SpatialOS, which is one such technology.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/improbable-spatialos-simulated-cities
Obviously something being doable means little in the context of SC until we see things actually implemented.
Client-side server-validated physics has been known for quite some time now, and that's usually one of the main issue with physics on a network (assuming you have prediction and lag compensation working). But he's not even talking about that. What they're doing is essentially claiming that they continue simulating stuff that you don't see. I hardly find that groundbreaking.
But then again people are cheering at something like Kythera, so what do I know...
- Status