Why doesn't Frontier invest in dedicated servers?

Chaparral

Chaparral
babelfisch said:
We are talking about this game?


If your expectations are that low I could see it work. I prefer to keep the high quality of Elite.

By the way, GW2 combat is definetely not twitch, it isn't even an active combat system. The game still rolls a dice to determine if your attack hit or missed, there is no collision system for your weapons and enemies. You can just hit the air and the game decides if you magically hit the enemy.
Click to expand...

You might grab a clip of a wvw zerg battle for a better representation of what is possible. All character models have hit boxes, just like we have in elite. If your targeted attack intersects with the hitbox, then you hit. You certainly can miss in GW2 with a poorly aimed or dodged attack. There are collision mechanics, not every object, but they are present.

GW2 is HOW MANY YEARS OLD? Central servers are absolutely superior to p2p for multiplayer combat.
 

Genar-Hofoen

Genar-Hofoen
Every time I read these forums and trainwreck threads like these, a little piece of me dies, because it just makes me feel even sadder that Frontier decided to try to make a new Elite game be "multi-player", rather than keep to the successful single-player formula it was in the past. The amount of dev time squandered because "multiplayer" that could have gone instead into creating a full-featured single-player modern Elite game.

And threads like these wouldn't exist apart from perhaps the odd "I wish Elite IV had multiplayer" - they might be trainwreck threads too in that alternate universe ;)
 

babelfisch

babelfisch
masCh said:
Seriously the Private Group and Solo game modes need to be retired. It brought up numerous issues that tied developer's man hours when they could have been better used to implement floating around your ships, or generating artificial gravity while your crew mate attempts to walk to your FSD module.
Click to expand...

It would be even better to remove PvP from the game, since it would affect a smaller part of the customers. Be careful what you wish for.
 

babelfisch

babelfisch
Commander Danicus said:
You might grab a clip of a wvw zerg battle for a better representation of what is possible. All character models have hit boxes, just like we have in elite. If your targeted attack intersects with the hitbox, then you hit. You certainly can miss in GW2 with a poorly aimed or dodged attack. There are collision mechanics, not every object, but they are present.

GW2 is HOW MANY YEARS OLD? Central servers are absolutely superior to p2p for multiplayer combat.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the hit boxes are just like 5 times bigger than the model because the netcode isn't accurate enough to register real hits. Anyway, I don't argue against dedicated servers being superior under most circumstances. It's just that most MMOs don't use an active and precise combat system like ED.
 

AP Birdman

Banned
AP Birdman
babelfisch said:
It would be even better to remove PvP from the game, since it would affect a smaller part of the customers. Be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

Lol, you think pvpers make up a smaller portion of the player base? You're funny.

On topic, dedicated servers need to happen in this game. Instancing is horrible. Many times in the past week I have flown into the CG and seen that I have 20+ friends in my friends list in system, yet I can't see a single one of them.
 

Micha

Micha
Sylow said:
.
Interestingly enough, most of this could be done easily. It only fails due to a few small details. The game has some management in the background, which determines which PC is "host" and which is "client" for each instance.
Click to expand...

I think you fail to grasp both "easily" as well as the role of a "host" in a P2P system.

I don't know the precise details of the Elite implementation, of course, but generally speaking in a P2 game, a Host simply coordinates and arbitrates the remaining nodes. Precisely what it does varies in each implementation. For example, in more traditional games where the Host has control of the instance, the Host player can manage the other players (invite, accept, reject, boot, etc).

But the actual P2P traffic still goes from each client to each client; it doesn't all get routed through the Host as per a Client-Server system. And this means that it only takes a single "bad" node to significantly impact the instance.
 

IndigoWyrd

IndigoWyrd
AP IBirdman said:
Lol, you think pvpers make up a smaller portion of the player base? You're funny.

On topic, dedicated servers need to happen in this game. Instancing is horrible. Many times in the past week I have flown into the CG and seen that I have 20+ friends in my friends list in system, yet I can't see a single one of them.
Click to expand...

What was the Official Figure? 2.8%?
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
CCP(EVE) are probably the best at this kind of networking.
If it was easy to make global, single instance, client/server, real time space combat, the would have put cockpits in EVE.
 

babelfisch

babelfisch
Gaarp Kobayashi said:
"10%"? "Most people"?? LOL dude!!!!!

And you have this knowledge from...? :p

You'd be perfect brexiteer with such a fake rhetoric! ;)
Click to expand...

Maybe not 10% but evidently only a small part of the playerbase. First because FDEV told us and second because the 63% of the mega survey are unlikely to PvP at Sag A.


1 Explorer 7,895 / 63%
2 Bounty Hunter 7,255 / 58%
3 Trader 6,823 / 54%
4 Miner 1,555 / 12%
5 Other 1,536 / 12%
6 Emergent Gameplay Deliverer 1,494 / 12%
7 Pirate 745 / 6%

We also had several polls on the forum, like this one:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...kind-of-game-Elite-is-for-you-PVP-PVE-or-both
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/248957-The-unavoidable-poll-PvP-vs-PvE!

As said above, the 10% are probably exaggerated, point was that PvP players are not the majority.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom