The Star Citizen Thread V10

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
You know - I still cannot work out this whole “servers are full but we have all this new content we want to show you, but can’t because our servers can't handle it” nonsense.

How many states can be represented in one byte?
Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.

After the trip to BP for DG2, it feels like a breath of fresh air to play SC, and to have people to shoot almost everywhere I go.
 
Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.

After the trip to BP for DG2, it feels like a breath of fresh air to play SC, and to have people to shoot almost everywhere I go.

This is only because everyone is currently forced into a bottle neck of one system. Wait for the 100+ systems to be released later on :unsure::ROFLMAO: then it will feel a lot emptier
 
Re. The servers are full comment.

They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.

Non technically oriented people trying to relate technical issues to other non-technically oriented people, and having a bad time of it.

But whatever.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.
Despite all the bugs and crashes, it's just fun.

People are complaining about the game feeling empty because Jumptown got the nerf bat, but Star Citizen never feels empty.

But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Re. The servers are full comment.

They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.



But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.

Yeah, also I presume the comment about "servers are actually full" and equating it to "fun", is a bit misleading. I would imagine the main SC server aggregates players into servers by default (as opposed to creating 1 server per player) so roughly 10,000 concurrent players would fill up 200 servers of 50 cap. If there were only 100 concurrent players they would also fill 2 servers. In all cases the games would feel "full", but only in one of those two scenarios the game is actually a ghost town and clear indication of not much fun...
 
Last edited:
Our servers are full, we cannot put anymore content on them.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zPhpxYD7f8&feature=youtu.be&t=1453

The best part of the stream is where they talk about how Roberts is an "amazing programmer" and they imply that he is actively working on the codebase.

Q21) What technical challenges need to be overcome to bring Ship-to-Station and Ship-to-Ship Docking online?

TL;DR
Chris has done a significant amount of work on Docking that needs to go through QA and polishing. Despite that, they still need to make sure that when ships are Docked, they can persist even if they're streamed-out (so if two ships that are docked together are streamed-out, then need to still be docked together when they're streamed back in). It's also unknown what should happen to the interior atmospheres when Docking, which will need to be addressed.

One thing stopping it that MA can think of is "CR's magical stream". Mark goes on to say that CR (Chris Roberts) is an amazing programmer who has a nice little stream (of code I presume?) where he's changing a lot of the underlying ways of how they attach things, and he has the support of a lot of the Lead Programmers and Engine Tech. So in this stream, he's changing how the Devs attach things to-and-from different things, and one of the problems with the current tech is that, if they want to attach a ship to another ship, a whole slew of problems arise because the ship has an interior physics grid with a bunch of Object Containers, and if you attach it to another one of those, the code doesn't handle it very well and it has problems. So in that stream, he has provided a way to fix those issues, so that a ship could be attached to another ship and it would work as you would expect. If that tech gets past QA and they fix some of the bugs that have resulted from it, it would open up the doors to give them the ability to attach a ship to a ship, so you could dock a ship directly on another ship. For example, on the Constellation there's a fake Merlin atm because they don't have this docking ability yet, but if they get this tech in and working then they could do this properly. The other part of the problem is persistence, where if they do Dock two ships then they have to have some sort of game code understand that they have some sort of ship docked to another, so that when they're streamed-out and streamed back in, the states and connections are established. Then there's the other aspect of gameplay: what does it mean to dock a ship to another ship? Does the interior atmo need to be vented, or do they need to decompress? So it's coming, and once all the pieces are together then more might be said about Docking.

Credit: u/Nauxill

There is no way Roberts is actively coding anything. As they progress through their careers, senior programmers tend to move on to management, tech review or team lead type roles. I would imagine that very few people actively code past the age of 40 (in an enterprise context).

This is just ridiculous. I also wonder what exactly they mean by "a nice little stream." Sounds like to me.
 
This is only because everyone is currently forced into a bottle neck of one system. Wait for the 100+ systems to be released later on :unsure::ROFLMAO: then it will feel a lot emptier
Re. The servers are full comment.
They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations. This is with about 1:1000th of the content they have said the game will have. They have to rewrite a ton of existing code to work with SS:OCS, another feature that is still in design/prototyping phase.
But SC is not going to feel empty when there is only a single system and limited areas to explore and travel times that dissuade people from venturing out and about. I remember Elite's premium beta also feeling full when they only had a small number of star systems.

I don't actually have any faith that they'll pull off more than a few star systems. The ship balancing seems to point towards a somewhat smaller than commonly imagined gameplay area imho.

Carrier gameplay development will be interesting to watch.

Yeah, also I presume the comment about "servers are actually full" and equating it to "fun", is a bit misleading. I would imagine the main SC server aggregates players into servers by default (as opposed to creating 1 server per player) so roughly 10,000 concurrent players would fill up 200 servers of 50 cap. If there were only 100 concurrent players they would also fill 2 servers. In all cases the games would feel "full", but only in one of those two scenarios the game is actually a ghost town and clear indication of not much fun...

You have quite the imagination.

But I see the same people at random less often than I did in E: D, despite frequenting CG's for years, and refusing most friend requests.
It's hardly a ghost town.
Despite a few people wishing desperately that it was.
 
I don't actually have any faith that they'll pull off more than a few star systems. The ship balancing seems to point towards a somewhat smaller than commonly imagined gameplay area imho.

It would probably be a good idea to only have a few systems. To be fair I would buy it if the released it with one well made system
 
They're saying that they cannot add any more content on the servers because of RAM limitations.

Really? That's interesting - because even on beginner-tier servers you can shove a couple of Tb of sticks in - and even in the most wasteful way possible you could "give" 128 players 16Gb of pool each, which is likely to be greater than or equal to local pool.
 
So the narrative will go from "you'll see how awesome SC will be when we'll have 1000 player + 9000 lifelike NPCs on 50 fully-fledged systems" to "SC is perfectly fine with a handful of systems with 50 players max, because it is sooooo much full of life than any other game ever made before"?

And they're still hoping server side OCS and server meshing will make everything possible, just now they're less arrogant. They're preparing the narrative switch. And we will be told any true believer already knew this since long.
 
Really? That's interesting - because even on beginner-tier servers you can shove a couple of Tb of sticks in - and even in the most wasteful way possible you could "give" 128 players 16Gb of pool each, which is likely to be greater than or equal to local pool.

They use Amazon EC2 C5 Compute instances which max out at 144GB.

When Sean Tracy was saying RAM was an issue, it was in the context of dev's running a server locally on their PC. So not entirely clear that the servers are running out of RAM or if it is a combination of all the objects and the ability of their code to multi-thread.

Microtech is scheduled for end of this year would be the next big increase in content. It's on the roadmap, but nothing about Server Side OCS/ Server Meshing / Server Persistence is.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
You have quite the imagination.

No need for much imagination, I just outlined the different basic scenarios that can explain how a server is full. A server being full does not tell us much about overall concurrency levels. You on the other hand seemed to have chosen only one possible scenario and thereby jumping to baseless conclusions. Which leads me to:

It's hardly a ghost town. Despite a few people wishing desperately that it was.

It is really not a matter of whishing anything, it is just a matter of facts: Do you have any actual figures for concurrency in the SC PU or are you just making up your own facts?
 
Last edited:
They use Amazon EC2 C5 Compute instances which max out at 144GB.

When Sean Tracy was saying RAM was an issue, it was in the context of dev's running a server locally on their PC. So not entirely clear that the servers are running out of RAM or if it is a combination of all the objects and the ability of their code to multi-thread.

Microtech is scheduled for end of this year would be the next big increase in content. It's on the roadmap, but nothing about Server Side OCS/ Server Meshing / Server Persistence is.

He's definitely talking about servers available to the public as well as running local instances for dev purposes.

We are hitting and honestly, we hit them a quarter ago, we are at a very serious limit right now of content on the server.
It's actually really hard for us to even run our servers locally on our PCs now because it's just the sheer amount of RAM we need so we've gotten to this state where there is no more content that we can shove on there. We have to have this (SS:OCS)
 
RAM starved server instances struggling to cope with content. RAM starved local clients struggling to deal with poorly thought out .pak.

CI-G grabs root cause, and spends devtime reiterating hair.

Besides - if RAM is claimed as the blocker to the actual manifestation of the Vision, I'll loan one of my rigs to CI-G so they can have a go on real-metal Tb. They'll need to provide their own GPU of course :D
 
Last edited:
They use Amazon EC2 C5 Compute instances which max out at 144GB.

When Sean Tracy was saying RAM was an issue, it was in the context of dev's running a server locally on their PC. So not entirely clear that the servers are running out of RAM or if it is a combination of all the objects and the ability of their code to multi-thread.

Microtech is scheduled for end of this year would be the next big increase in content. It's on the roadmap, but nothing about Server Side OCS/ Server Meshing / Server Persistence is.

It all seems a bit strange to me, but i probably don't understand sofware development or something.

My guess is they are actually keeping everything loaded all the time regardless of whether it is in use and due to lack of server meshing they can't parcel the load out.

So.... if it is a matter of waiting for server meshing, and if the thing has hit a limit, then Microtech is going to have to wait until then.

It does tie in with the comment from the other week from a dev where he was talking about hiding server boundaries in the QT spaces, which will literally make QT a loading screen at certain points.

When i tried to discuss this with a backer.... well, i think you can imagine how that went down. It bloody well makes sense as well. Some of them have such a hard on for Chris' vision of one instance across the whole galaxy they don't want to hear about senisble technical decision to make things actually work. I tried to point out it wasn't a criticism but just reality, but they didn't want to hear it. I mean, why does anyone actually need to be in the same instance as someone else who is thousands or millions of km distance from them?

This is one of the major challenges the devs must be facing. Trying to make things work like CR has declared they must be vs the reality of .... well, reality.
 
Yeah, also I presume the comment about "servers are actually full" and equating it to "fun", is a bit misleading. I would imagine the main SC server aggregates players into servers by default (as opposed to creating 1 server per player) so roughly 10,000 concurrent players would fill up 200 servers of 50 cap. If there were only 100 concurrent players they would also fill 2 servers. In all cases the games would feel "full", but only in one of those two scenarios the game is actually a ghost town and clear indication of not much fun...
Back during the Alpha 2.0 to Alpha 2.4 six-month period, Star Citizen had an average concurrent playercount of only 315:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/4qxhep/_/d4wql9m
Meanwhile, CIG told us via the latest Forbes article that Star Citizen had a total of (only) 40,000 Citizens playing a week.
 
The best part of the stream is where they talk about how Roberts is an "amazing programmer" and they imply that he is actively working on the codebase.

You don't get to stay in a senior position at CIG unless you're skilled at massaging Roberts' ego.

The servers are actually full. Pretty much constantly.

And yet any time I watch a stream of someone playing alone rather than with a coordinated group of mates they spend most of their time aimlessly running around dead locations populated with zombie NPCs, and rarely encounter anyone else. A full server doesn't really mean much, even in SC's micro-verse, when the game can handle so few players to start with. I'm sure when the diffusion server meshing comes online and they have hundreds of thousands of players in the same instance it will be a different story, not that that will ever happen.
 
Back during the Alpha 2.0 to Alpha 2.4 six-month period, Star Citizen had an average concurrent playercount of only 315:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/4qxhep/_/d4wql9m
Meanwhile, CIG told us via the latest Forbes article that Star Citizen had a total of (only) 40,000 Citizens playing a week.
They had 40,000 (claimed) folks trying out the free-fly/expo in October/November last year. That's where that figure comes from. Since that expo, numbers have plummeted...mostly because the majority of them didn't buy into SC and just sampled the free-fly event.. Similar to the latest free fly, the majority took the opportunity to try for free but sensibly didn't fork out and buy in...so now we're left with the remaining longer term backers + a few newbies after that last free-fly week. It's certainly nowhere near 40,000...perhaps drop a few zeros and it'd be more accurate. ;)
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom