Every year Chris dies on his stretch goals so the backers technical debts can be forgiven. 3 days later he arises a better developer. Amen.
The Star Citizen Thread V10
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
- Status
In response to a question asking how server meshing is possible:
robertsspaceindustries.com
ConstantinCray said:
Clive Johnson CIG said:
Spectrum - v7.52.1
RSI’s Spectrum is our integrated community and player interaction service, including chat, forums, game integration, and Player Organization facilities. Player Organizations (“Org”...
robertsspaceindustries.com
Today on “Things That Should Have Been Sorted Out Half a Decade Ago And Decided On Long Before That (Season 8)” we will be discussing… 
…oh and: “we can add as many of these as we want to our network within a matter of minutes”
That's nice, except you kind of need to be able to do it — and have them spun up, synced and operational — within a matter of seconds.
…oh and: “we can add as many of these as we want to our network within a matter of minutes”
That's nice, except you kind of need to be able to do it — and have them spun up, synced and operational — within a matter of seconds.
Last edited:
I like where he says
The difference of course, being that Dual Universe started with their design in mind
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeZtqoydXpc
The difference of course, being that Dual Universe started with their design in mind
Another response from Clive in the same thread
Oh my... oh my oh my.
So, basically, the thousands of players all interacting in the same area is not happening, at least any time soon, and possibly never. In the end, they are having to go with what is practical to ship the game as opposed to dreams.
Also, note the bit about how the meshing will have borders in QT areas. Basically, QT is going to be a loading screen as you jump from server to server. There will be no flying from one region to another without loading.... and this is within the same system.
Reminder to backers: This is the way it was always planned. It was never planned to be another way. CIG are taking the time to get everything right and not do things half baked. Backers probably voted for it to be this way anyway... erm.. somewhen. This is good for Star Citizen.
Narrator: there is a different plan in the linked thread
Ahh this little gem
"When we can't co-locate interacting players on the same server, we'll fudge it with typical networking smoke-and-mirrors. That shouldn't really be any worse than players interacting in a peer-to-per game. "
I absolutely cannot wait to see how on earth they plan on implementing this in any way that isn't a complete disaster. It's going to be epically hilarious though
"When we can't co-locate interacting players on the same server, we'll fudge it with typical networking smoke-and-mirrors. That shouldn't really be any worse than players interacting in a peer-to-per game. "
I absolutely cannot wait to see how on earth they plan on implementing this in any way that isn't a complete disaster. It's going to be epically hilarious though
I don't know - Dual Universe isn't something I follow. Now, from what little I know about it - that's also going to have player segregation with secure and non-secure areas, and I'm not even sure if it's in real time - but at least looking over the jobs page it appears they at least understand the fundamentals of large scale network implementation.
CI-G on the other hand, well, look for yourself
You know… at this stage, and with the history of the company and its development process in mind, I would say that if CIG can't do it, then yes, Dual Universe probably can't because CIG's continual failure suggests that it just can't be all that hard.
After all, this is a company that took an FPS engine with built-in FPS functionality, and only barely managed to make an FPS in it.
what does that word mean..."re..le..as.e"?
Whatever plan is announced, it becomes the plan that always was.
Brian Chambers said:
Source: https://twitter.com/StarBurgernl/status/1122121032108847104
And there you have it. CIG are sitting on tonnes of additional content, they have in their possession the mystical patch which will turn an anaemic MVP into "the best damn first person universe sim ever".
Unfortunately, and as much as they wish otherwise, they simply cannot share it with the people who paid for it...
Pull the other one Chambers.
It already does.
Nothing on that roadmap about server meshing.
I did see this on tests they have done:
no idea if it is in the actual alpha.
I backed DU as well and have access to the alpha but have never tried it.
Nice thing about SC is the alpha is out in the open. DU alpha is under NDA, so even if I had played it I wouldn't be able to talk about it.
That's a real quote? Its not a joke?
Guys, i think we can shut up shop. They are doing a better job of ridiculing themselves than we could ever do.
Basically they are saying they focused so much on producing assets the game engine itself can't handle things.
And this is something many of us have been saying for years. They got their development backwards. So focused on selling ships they forgot to develop the actual game.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
CIG said:
Not an expert in network by any kind of standard other than extreme advanced wisdom required to set up a wifi at home but... This CIG comment I think deserves the usual "what can possibly go wrong?" meme. What makes the 50 vs 50 scenario essentially different from a 10 vs 10 x 5 in terms of server transition (and cross server data network requirements) shenanigans, latency, physically co-located players not seeing the same things/players, etc etc etc as they all arbitrarily go moving around to and fro whenever and wherever the frack they so desire and engage with whomever they so desire, as they play out that 50 vs 50 battle? What if all that happens in a very reduced volume of space where most of those 100 players can see each other? What if each of them has its own space ship?
What if another 50 players come in to the same spot and try to 3rd party the first 100? What if another 50 come by too to the same location? Peer to peer or otherwise!
When you read the subsequent answers from this dev in that discussion you get the distinctive impression the guy is just improvising on the fly and has very little clue how things will pan out in the end. Like if they were still at the start of the process. The concept of server/instance max capacity is openly acknowledged but at the same time all the issues and limitations that come with it are completely ignored and hand waved with what basically amounts to a "trust me, everything will be allright".
Last edited:
It's symptomatic of a larger theme that has run through all of CIG's concepts since day one. Chris' “creative” mind has always revolved around replicating scenes from whatever movie/tv series/book he last saw/read, and that narrow “scene” thinking seems to have infected the whole project and everyone involved with it as well.
Imagine flying through a city like in Blade Runner!
Imagine dropping off tanks like in Aliens!
Imagine getting attacked by worms like in Dune!
Imagine playing space-chess while going through hyperspace!
Imagine shooting out of the back of a jeep while being hunted by flying stuff like in Terminator!
Imagine taking a train like in… eh… I don't know… Silver Streak?
At no point is the gap between those scenes, or even the edges of them, considered. What if you just land right outside so you don't have the be hunted by HKs or worms? What if you have no-one to play chess with? What if train travel just isn't interesting (that's why you bring a book to read)?
It's the same thing here. Someone has envisioned a scene where 50v50 fighting goes on. The response to the immediately obvious problem that the servers might not be able to cope with that is to just scale the scene down: let's simply envision 10v10 fighting instead! Five times! But it's still the same static scene thinking. No consideration is made of the fact that the fight might evolve; that people might leave or join; that ships can carry ships (and EVA suits) that spew out so suddenly the exact same 50v50 fight is actually a 200v200; that it might be a 99v1 instead; that the five 10v10s might be completely separate in practice but coincide completely in time and space. How do you distinguish one scene from the other? How do you transition between them? Indeed, how do you determine what's relevant to the scene in any scenario?
It'll all just fix itself through magic — the scenes will happen and the transitions will be seamless because after all, when you imagine it all, the designer's brain skips seamlessly from one to the other. Games work exactly the same, right?
- Status