Didn't the alpha, which came 1 year after the Kickstarter, use peer to peer?
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Yeah could probably argue over its robustness, but doesn't seem to have been an afterthought.
Was referenced on the KS page from day 1 at any rate.
Was referenced on the KS page from day 1 at any rate.
On the subject of KS was listening to this 2013 broadcast last night from @LaveRadio . Cant link the exact podcast / broadcast but its the one at the bottom, the 4th one, 'Conclave 5'. They are comparing the SC & ED KS pitches one year after, not salty or criticising just comparing the different pitch videos and still expecting both games to be good, but funny how it all worked out with hindsight about what they were talking about. Its only the first 10 minutes or less that are relevant but just, yeah funny how that worked out, and some of it was prescient.
I think the whole architecture was planned like it is. AWS and P2P and all that.
There were obvious last minute changes to the multiplayer format of Elite, and that really weird choice of network code is probably one of them. We can only see the results and some clues like them changing the format (always online) from what was promised initially... Anyway, it's still the weakest part along with powerplay.
Last edited:
Dude stop saying these things
You said it was clearly an afterthought but it wasn't and now you're saying it was an obvious last minute change but there is no evidence to support that isn’t that a matter that depends on the topology of the cluster and how the application (star citizen) makes use of that topology?
they keep saying server mesh... but is that full mesh, partial mesh?
But let’s not go down that rabbit hole because it can get messy considering that they are promising that their solution can scale to the point of sub-subdividing a room (which would imply that my game client will probably need to talk to multiple nodes in order to render what is in my character’s viewport, ship sanner, etc, etc... either of having some kind of controller/load balancer that will condense the info and push it my my game client)
To inform the typical E
forum member, which are usually well infomed and do spit not hatred:BOTH (nyx and pyro) have their appearances as delivery in the progress tracker (which either means already worked or planned as target).
And the predictions steems from the fact, that pyro and nyx are the connecting systems to ODIN (where SQ42 takes place and should fully developed as part of the SQ42 campaign). So whenever they bring SQ42 to beta / release, they could reveal ODIN and the having the connecting systems already in the verse would be a nice feature.
I am a dev - it is for a MMO. It cannot scale for the purpose of a real time game.
We only have hand waves there at the moment.. We'll see when supposedly it is implemented, then the proof will be in the pudding as the saying goes.
1 - you misread me (never said it wasn't)Dude stop saying these things
2 - you really are white knighting, here of all places ?
3 - the proof is also just here sitting on my computer
CRoberts would be spamming nonstop videos about how great it's going to be with pictures of it etc. Over the years CiG have shown that if they have anything at all, even before it's completed, they'll do a victory dance around it. Every time. All we know is they are working on Pyro as we indeed have seen pictures of it.
Last edited:
It scales the way they want it to, and gives them some advantages. MMO is not a universally defined term.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Seems to me p2p was actually a very deliberate, integral and fundamental decision for Elite design. Probably critical, among other things, to enable the project commercially. Like it or not.
Mostly wrong on every thing.
There is alrady a persistance layer (P-Cache) but the design of this is server driven but there is no guarantee that you can get back to the server you crashed, so this is persistence session based (only few data is global like ships you own or the money you have). The other problem of P-Cache that it sits directly on top of the database which does make sharing a complicated manuever when you introduce multiple servers handling one player. This system was good enough for AC or SM but it totally failed for PU and its requirements (super fast access to player data but data is still persistent between sessions). The solution to that is now the icache - a in memory database front end, that holds the data needed and a async backend that writes changed data back to the conventional database.
Servermeshing is their idea to share the workload so that the ONE SERVER for ONE VERSE is gone (which is quite a big blocker when you reach the capacity of that one server). Their idea is to use many small services that are bundled together and do the server stuff. These need to share data primarly via icache (which is already a global instance). With icache the problem shifts away from the "sharing data problem" to the "control of data problem" (having multiple servers running that are needed to virtually drive one player means, that you must control somehow which server has the lead for some particular data scheme (and is doing the updates vs. icache or you soon found yourself in a very complex locking system to avoid concurrent updates). If a different server needs a change, he must communicate it thru the lead server which than can do the update. Having a control layer for every service that exists and you can build your meshing dynamically as you can distribute the workload freely and you still can do updates vs the back end.
If something is clearly an afterthought it can't also not be clearly an afterthought.
Oh come on now, challenging your statements is not whiteknighting.
But that is not proof per se, that is just taking what you perceive as evidence and using it to support your stance. What we would really need is a statement from Frontier or one of the devs.
I'm not intending to be combative, I just think declarative statements without any real supporting evidence is the wrong way to go about things.
The way it was coded, the way the "always online" was a last minute decision, the way it handles instances and also imposes strict limitations on the multiplayer aspect of the game, etc. besides it's off topic so I dont want to expand. Also network traces can reveal a lot (as they do for SC and it's terrifying, and I remember doing that for EvE too to understand how they coded their game back then). I maintain it's a poor choice generally speaking and there's a good reason why competitive multiplayer games stay away from that architecture.
You must purchase something that has "Star Citizen Digital Download" which allows you to access the LIVE PU at any time (access to test system PTU is restricted but public access is always granted as last step after a few weeks). PTU needs also the "Star Citizen Digital Download". You can use the free flight events to access the game without "Star Citizen Digital Download" but only during that event (however: what you manage to aquire in that time stays in your account for the next free flight). Be aware that wipes will remove any progress and bugs can do that also.
Cheapest package is around 50€, you can get a 5€ discounts on some events (so basically 45€ is the lower end).
I am sure this will be interesting.
Haha, I'm gonna add that to my CIG -bingo. The rest of this post is gonna be great!
And what a great post it was!
Anyway, I've always believed that people who type the above should be given their own platform where they explain things like 'cheese' and 'car batteries' with the same combination of meaningless buzzwords, ignorance and self-confidence.
Last edited:
To inform the typical E
BOTH (nyx and pyro) have their appearances as delivery in the progress tracker (which either means already worked or planned as target).
And the predictions steems from the fact, that pyro and nyx are the connecting systems to ODIN (where SQ42 takes place and should fully developed as part of the SQ42 campaign). So whenever they bring SQ42 to beta / release, they could reveal ODIN and the having the connecting systems already in the verse would be a nice feature.
Unfortunately, that requires believing everything CIG says and that they will actually deliver on things in line with their schedule.
Remember, this is the company that took around 6 months to rework elevator panels.
You also note the connection with SQ$2. Remind me, what is the release date for it? Also, release of SQ42 is just part 1. The whole story in that part might take place in just one system. Plus, because its a singleplayer game and Chris loves his cinematics, they may do plenty of cutscenes and any travel to another "system" might simply be to discrete areas, like many single player games do, in no way meaning that just because part of the story involves some fight at a station in Pyro or Nyx that the whole system is there. A lot depends on how much freedom of movement is provided in SQ42. There are lots of things they can do to provide the illusion of various locations with limited areas.
So, in short, be careful of raising your expectations too high, only believe what you see in game when its released. It really is the best way to deal with CIG (and to be fair, most gaming companies).