Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
sovapid said:
You think Dual Universe is peddling crazy talk completely disconnected from reality as well?

They are talking about doing the same thing.
Click to expand...

Fully aware. Havent been able to see yet a large numbers ship battle in that game though. Will see. War Thunder, IL2 and DCS is 20-30 tops for a stable scenario and that is already on the edge, as I said.

The best example I have actually experienced of large numbers ship battles (twitch based cockpit sim experience like) is Infinity Battlescape (I am a backer). The battles were spectacular. And something FDEV network devs may be interested in looking at. It is probably about the only sim-like game out there that I have seen so far manage a decent number of crafts in the same location.

Now having said that I never saw hundreds, nevermind thousands, of players in the same location or battle. At most the battles I took part in had a few tens of players at any given time, maybe 30-40 in the best of cases? (very smooth all of it though) Although maybe I missed the really big battles, so this is just anecdotal for me. Infinity Battlescape can host hundreds of players in the same scenario but most of those players were spread out quite far appart across the whole system and the netcode logic probably does not need to update your client as often for those ships far away not interacting with you at all etc (which is in essence no different from what Elite does). Also the ships themselves did not strike me as onerous as Elite´s or DCS´s in terms of quantity and complexity of systems and modules, which is info that I suspect also takes part in real time data exchanges during a battle etc. Maybe DU tries something similar to IB and can get close to that scale but that would mean a rather simplified ship model and systems to save on bandwidth, which I do not think is what SC is aiming for.
 
Last edited:

sovapid

sovapid
Viajero said:
Fully aware. Havent been able to see yet a large numbers ship battle in that game though. Will see. War Thunder, IL2 and DCS is 20-30 tops for a stable scenario and that is already on the edge, as I said.

The best example I have actually experienced of large ship numbers battles (twitch based cockpit sim experience like) is Infinity Battlescape (I am a backer). The battles were spectacular. And something FDEV network devs may be interested in looking at. It is probably about the only sim-like game out there that I have seen so far manage a decent number of crafts in the same location.

Now having said that I never saw hundreds, nevermind thousands, of players in the same location or battle. At most the battles I took part in had a few tens of players at any given time, maybe 30-40 in the best of cases? (very smooth all of it though) Although maybe I missed the really big battles, so this is just anecdotal for me. Infinity Battlescape can host hundreds of players in the same scenario but most of those players were spread out quite far appart across the whole system and the netcode logic probably does not need to update your client as often for those ships far away not interacting with you at all etc (which is in essence no different from what Elite does). Also the ships themselves did not strike me as onerous as Elite´s or DCS´s in terms of quantity and complexity of systems and modules, which is info that I suspect also takes part in real time data exchanges during a battle etc. Maybe DU tries something similar to IB and can get close to that scale but that would mean a rather simplified ship model and systems to save on bandwidth, which I do not think is what SC is aiming for.
Click to expand...

DU "flight model" was a lot more like Kerbal than SC or ED, at least when I was playing/paying attention. Not so much dogfighting because it was so hard to change directions.

IB was fun, but it was like the first weekend it came out that people were playing it. It died off so fast.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
sovapid said:
You think Dual Universe is peddling crazy talk completely disconnected from reality as well?

They are talking about doing the same thing.
Click to expand...

They seem to be doing ok at achieving it as well.

However, it was one of their core plans from the start and they seemed to understand what they needed to do and focused on doing it, while understanding rubbish like fidelity can come later.

CIG went about it totally backwards. They announced they could do it without stopping to check they could, focused on making ships and other things before working on getting many players playing together in the same instance.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
WhiteHaulerMan said:
I will say ArmA chunters on fairly well with 80-90 folk on a server.
Click to expand...

And in Squad is 50 v 50, i.e. 100 folk, no issues (well, the few helis in each map still rubberband quite a lot but hey). But I was discussing ships, cockpits, systems, physicalized modules, multiple simultaneous weaponry, defence systems etc per player etc. Not an expert but I suspect the bandwidth requirements per ship in Elite or SC are much higher and much more data hungry than per ArmA or Squad player on foot. Much like in DCS or IL2 which start struggling with 20-30.
 
Last edited:

WhiteHaulerMan

WhiteHaulerMan
Viajero said:
And in Squad is 50 v 50, i.e. 100, no issues. But I was discussing ships, cockpits, systems, multiple simultaneous weaponry, defence systems etc per player etc. Not an expert but I suspect the data bandwidth requirements per ship are much higher than per ArmA or Squad player on foot. Much like in DCS or IL2 which struggle with 20-30.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I think its important to point out that ArmA also simulates those things also in its engine, which is used in multiplayer. For example, when we used to do Rolling Thunder, it was 90 players combined arms multi-crew misadventures. And the combined arms multi-group games I used to help run were a similar number vs. AI

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn_ku6c37rY


As a sidebar, I dread to think how many people you had in an instance during WWII Onlines peak period, all on 128 ISDN at best!

Edited: Removed weird 'Lol p' fragment from start of post.
 
Last edited:

VR jefranklin18

VR jefranklin18
Mole HD said:
As games go for me...since late last year I've been absolutely engrossed in two games in particular, both I wrongly assumed wouldn't hold my interest for longer than the time it took to fire them up on my PC. Valheim being one, the other being a 4 year old Playstation title by the name of Horizon Zero Dawn :)

If HZD had been simultaneously released across all current platforms instead of being locked away behind Sony's exclusivity wall for 3 years, to my mind it would have been a Rockstar beater. Since December, I've sunk almost as many hours into that gameworld as I have in the Witcher 3 or RDR2 on both the Xbox and PC over the last 3 years...HZD is absolutely stunning and very, very special.
Click to expand...
I think I am going to have to get this Valheim based on the comments I read about it. Although the last time I did that it was Space Engineers which turned out to be a complete bust for me.

With HZD, the exclusivity in this context is understandable as it is a Sony-owned studio as opposed to them buying exclusivity so releasing on PC is a positive move by them. I've personally not played it, but the studio is responsible for the only FPS franchise that I enjoy (Killzone), so HZD being good is unsurprising.
 

VR jefranklin18

VR jefranklin18
WhiteHaulerMan said:
Lol
p


Fair enough, but I think its important to point out that ArmA also simulates those things also in its engine, which is used in multiplayer. For example, when we used to do Rolling Thunder, it was 90 players combined arms multi-crew misadventures. And the combined arms multi-group games I used to help run were a similar number vs. AI

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn_ku6c37rY


As a sidebar, I dread to think how many people you had in an instance during WWII Onlines peak period, all on 128 ISDN at best!
Click to expand...
MAG on the PS3 had 256 players on PS3 in pitched battles. Was really good fun, especially with the in-studio news broadcasts that gave the overall war progress.
 

Surefoot

S
Viajero said:
Absolutely not. Not sure how many other twitch based sim type games you have played. But just for context and reference, equivalent sim-like cockpit experience games like War Thunder or DCS easily start having network issues when we get close to 20-25 players mark. And that is server based best in class games, not even p2p.
Click to expand...
Not "best in class" for the netcode, by a very long shot, actually these are some of the worst examples. For high player count twitch-based multiplayer games I could cite Face of Mankind (former MMO) where i've seen about 200 people in one place shooting at each other, without any network issue. Like someone else said above, ArmA. I would also cite Tribes series, Planetside, and PUBG for examples of good netcode. I dont play Forntite but I'm quite certain that the netcode is also rock solid in that one. And more if I would make the effort to remember (EDIT: forgot to mention Infinity Battlescape ! This one runs rock solid too with 100+ players !). Some noteworthy examples are fighting games using both movement interpolation and action rewind to create frame-perfect action over an internet connection, like Skullgirls for example (and quite a few others, with the notable exception of Street Fighter series) - this is wizard level netcode though, i've delved into that and it's not for everyone.

SC has the problem of using a 15 year old netcode that was meant for LAN parties. Unless someone rewrites the core game engine entirely (which at this point is highly unlikely), it's here to stay. It was never meant to be used across high latency networks (Internet) and the physics engine shenanigans are a direct consequence of that. The fact that the action is also twitch-based makes it even worse.
sovapid said:
You think Dual Universe is peddling crazy talk completely disconnected from reality as well?

They are talking about doing the same thing.
Click to expand...
The main difference is DU was built entirely around that wizard-level network code (which uses real time spatial tesselation to subdivide the players into groups assigned to cloud nodes). I've said it previously, i've seen the Devoxx talk of their CEO/lead developer who's not only a genius developer but has a strong, solid vision. He made sure to develop the whole core game engine before adding anything costly (in terms of time spent) on top of it. They added the gameplay elements next, and the graphics last.
By comparison the CEO of CiG did contribute to the code of SC (according to various indirect sources): that's the physics engine. Do i need to post that trolley video ? The developer skill is clearly not the same...
 
Last edited:

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
Surefoot said:
Like someone else said above, ArmA. I would also cite Tribes series, Planetside, and PUBG for examples of good netcode.
Click to expand...

We have gone through that part of the discussion already I believe:

Game Discussions - Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

You think Dual Universe is peddling crazy talk completely disconnected from reality as well? They are talking about doing the same thing. Fully aware. Havent been able to see yet a large numbers ship battle in that game though. Will see. War Thunder, IL2 and DCS is 20-30 tops for a stable...
forums.frontier.co.uk

In terms of actual ships large number battle instancing, closer to the detailed systems Elite or SC consider, I think Infinity Battlescape is probably the most interesting example.
 
Last edited:

VR Mr Teatime

VR Mr Teatime
Viajero said:
We have gone through that part of the discussion already I believe:

Game Discussions - Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

You think Dual Universe is peddling crazy talk completely disconnected from reality as well? They are talking about doing the same thing. Fully aware. Havent been able to see yet a large numbers ship battle in that game though. Will see. War Thunder, IL2 and DCS is 20-30 tops for a stable...
forums.frontier.co.uk

In terms of actual ships large number battle instancing, closer to the detailed systems Elite or SC consider, I think Infinity Battlescape is probably the most interesting example.
Click to expand...
I'll put Falcon 4: Allied Force (2005) forward - we had over 40 hi fidelity F16 pilots in a campaign server alongside and fighting against 20,000+ persistent air, ground and sea NPC units (as well as persistent infrastructure e.g. bridges, runways etc.) on a 1,024x1,024km map. I think the longest campaign server (full war) I saw running in real time was over 2 weeks long, with clients/pilots joining and leaving missions generated by the campaign engine, as they were able/available.
 

Ronzer

Ronzer
Glen Fiddik said:
From a believer on the OverclockersUK forum
i do believe the game will be feature complete in 3 years. i did predict 2024 that this game will have most of teh core features done(salvaging, medical gameplay, exploration)

2 of the above is being rolled out across 3.14 and 3.15/3.16 t0 and if you look closely on the tracker, they are working on new scanning tech and a lil quantum drone u can send out affar and scan a place remotely!

im calling it now, this game will be a masterpeice and many who doubted it will jump onboard in 4-5 years time.

This will be the new "World of warcraft" best popular MMO in the future as you literally can do whatever the **** you want!

Dont like flying ships but just wanna be a bad halo/destiny type guy? sure fps in planet and moon side!

Like mining? sure we have it(Even now its viable)

Like dog fighting? sure we got you covered.

Like exploring new planets/ bioms, caves etc? sure we got you too!

The list goes on.

Its multiple games rolled into one basically!

Heck they will even add base building akin to valheim/fallout 4! what more do you want??!?!?!

I`m not sure he is serious
Click to expand...
What I find funny with these folks, is that they are saying these things, and it comes off as shoving it in your face. If SC releases in 2 years, they get to gloat and say "I was right and you weren't". But if thats the case, many of us in here will be playing SC and while they're gloating, go do a mission saying "this game is fun".
They get to gloat and say "I paid $4000 for this" and I get to say "I paid $35, thanks backer" and then go race my ship around.

The funnier part, to me, is my reply is reminiscent of a reply I read in an earlier iteration of this thread, a few yers ago, you know, when some backer or another said we'd have this game, at the latest, by 2019... "in your face!" Well, it's 2021. From what I've read recently, it sounds like they're in the beginning stages of finalizing a decision, or something. Wow! CIG invented beginning stages of finalizing!

You almost have to hope he's being a bit sardonic (did I use that word right?).

WhiteHaulerMan said:
Fair enough, but I think its important to point out that ArmA also simulates those things also in its engine, which is used in multiplayer. For example, when we used to do Rolling Thunder, it was 90 players combined arms multi-crew misadventures. And the combined arms multi-group games I used to help run were a similar number vs. AI

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn_ku6c37rY


As a sidebar, I dread to think how many people you had in an instance during WWII Onlines peak period, all on 128 ISDN at best!

Edited: Removed weird 'Lol p' fragment from start of post.
Click to expand...

Not to go completely off topic, but some folks complain about travel times in ED. Well, I recall being in ARMA 2 (yeah long long ago) and flying to a battlefield, in a chopper, with a well tuned squad. That flight seemed like it was 10 minutes long, but what a blast. Let alone having a good commander, ordering us troops in battle. Talk about immersion! Can only imagine what EDO would be like with that mentality. To keep it on topic, if SC had that stuff happening, that'd be sweet too. They should really start thinking of finishing the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom