I challenge Frontier Developements!

Crimson Kaim

Crimson Kaim
I challenge Frontier developements to provide a multiplayer experience with a ping of 100ms or better (less).

Just had a cool match with another commander in triple-dumbfire eagles and it was a combination of stupidity, frustration as well as laughter and fun but in the end it turned into sadness :D

The results were clear. The missiles fly past you, then you get damage and THEN the missiles explode. By all kinds of immersion, this is simply a crystal clear example of how multiplayer should NOT work :p


But in all seriousness. Do something about that please, Frontier. Yes you have claimed that your multiplayer experience isn't really ... well ... existing but that isn't an excuse to provide us with such an inefficient architecture. Go work on it until you achieve an average ping of 100ms (which still is ALOT) atleast for local players (US - US | UK - UK | France - Germany | Italy - Austria | etc.). But 2000ms (aka 2 seconds) is simply unacceptable long term and Elite has been released almost one and a half year ago.

Not to mention parallel universes or as we call it: instancing.

You have managed to balance SCBs, get rid of the stutter on planets (atleast for me), fixed the instancing right after the release and I have no doubt that you can provide a multipalyer experience similar to any other given multiplayer game.

I don't even care if it is P2P, a server or anything else as long as the ping stays below 100ms.
Oh, and pwetty pwease. If one commander is near the station, I want to see him, regardless of his location, skill level or whatnot. No more than one instance per location please. Let's say until September?

I give your graphics 9/10 (10/10 if asteorids fog returns and texture details don't disappear at 200 meters and further).
But I give you 3/10 for multiplayer experience. It works, but that's all. :/


Thanks :)
 
Last edited:

avow555

avow555
I hear your frustration but unless they come away from this p2p I suggest we are stuck with the current problems.
However if you get 2 or more players from different continents for example there will always be lag problems regardless of network configuration.
 
Last edited:

Kristov

K
Pretty sure that FD can't control the latency you experience in the game, but that may just be the thinking of an IT professional?
 

Crimson Kaim

Crimson Kaim
TheDayman said:
Err... latency is really up to Frontier on a P2P connection.
Click to expand...

Well they still decide what information will be sent. If they reduce the amount of information sent (which is basically the same as fixing lags ... FPS-lags) then we may have less to work with and so have more resources for faster connections.

An alternative would be ofcourse a proper server. Big games like EVE online, League of Legends World of Tanks/Planes/Ships all use a server architecture if I am not mistaken. Atleast my ping continously stays below 100ms and as someone who is used to 30ms or better, every 10 ms are a pain in the brain (Ha! That rhymes!).

What I want to point out is that it just feels wrong whe na ship is shooting into the void but yoi take damage from it or the common rubberbanding issue and all the connection issues which have their source in the current architecture. Either improve P2P or set up some servers or do something completely different. But I want to urge Frontier to actually do something about it ... and if they are already on it, a little faster as after two and a half years the problems still exist in the same way as before. :(
 

lysan

lysan
EVE works in a completely different way, basically it's a turn base MMO. What I see in games similar to ED are filters. if your ping is above 100 ms you can't join the server and will be kicked off. Placing people together who are friends, but have very different ping times must be a nightmare.
 

Talarin

T
Crimson Kaim said:
Well they still decide what information will be sent. If they reduce the amount of information sent (which is basically the same as fixing lags ... FPS-lags) then we may have less to work with and so have more resources for faster connections.

An alternative would be ofcourse a proper server. Big games like EVE online, League of Legends World of Tanks/Planes/Ships all use a server architecture if I am not mistaken. Atleast my ping continously stays below 100ms and as someone who is used to 30ms or better, every 10 ms are a pain in the brain (Ha! That rhymes!).

What I want to point out is that it just feels wrong whe na ship is shooting into the void but yoi take damage from it or the common rubberbanding issue and all the connection issues which have their source in the current architecture. Either improve P2P or set up some servers or do something completely different. But I want to urge Frontier to actually do something about it ... and if they are already on it, a little faster as after two and a half years the problems still exist in the same way as before. :(
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand what latency is. And if you're the problem then no architecture changes will help you.
 

SushiCW

SushiCW
Crimson Kaim said:
Well they still decide what information will be sent. If they reduce the amount of information sent (which is basically the same as fixing lags ... FPS-lags) then we may have less to work with and so have more resources for faster connections.

An alternative would be ofcourse a proper server. Big games like EVE online, League of Legends World of Tanks/Planes/Ships all use a server architecture if I am not mistaken. Atleast my ping continously stays below 100ms and as someone who is used to 30ms or better, every 10 ms are a pain in the brain (Ha! That rhymes!).

What I want to point out is that it just feels wrong whe na ship is shooting into the void but yoi take damage from it or the common rubberbanding issue and all the connection issues which have their source in the current architecture. Either improve P2P or set up some servers or do something completely different. But I want to urge Frontier to actually do something about it ... and if they are already on it, a little faster as after two and a half years the problems still exist in the same way as before. :(
Click to expand...

Just remember that's your ping to the server. The actual latency between "what the other guy does" and "when you see that it affects you" is going to be longer. Especially if you're throwing all of the fancy interpolation and client-side prediction / server side replay that exist to make the game feel smooth and seamless. It solves some problems but introduces others.
 

Crimson Kaim

Crimson Kaim
AJW said:
No, Frontier aren't going to fix the internet. Or buff the speed of light, which is ultimately what limits it in the first place...
Click to expand...

I don't expect them to push the limits but get close to them. And I can tell with a good amount of certainty that 2000ms is not the limit :)
 

CMDR Crumpeteer

CMDR Crumpeteer
Crimson Kaim said:
I don't expect them to push the limits but get close to them. And I can tell with a good amount of certainty that 2000ms is not the limit :)
Click to expand...

Of course it's not the limit, but then it's also not the best we get in Elite either. If you're getting 2000ms on a p2p connection, chances are one of you has a bad connection. One of the benefits of p2p is that you can get a better experience when playing with people who live near you, but even a server can't 'fix' 200+ latency when playing with someone on the other side of the planet.

Stop trying to blame FD for the current state of the Internet. Elite's instancing still needs work, but when it does work it's great.
 
Last edited:

dubsdj

dubsdj
I always thought that problem existed in any online game. Isn't it down to others internet connections? I thought if someone's ping is bad it spoils it for the others.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
FD have let's call it a slider. They can move it one way or the other. This determines how lax or tight the instance matchmaker is.

If its loose, you see more people in your instance, but accept lag as part of the game. If its tight, Open and groups move more towards a solo experience, where you only meet those with low pings.

If you want as little lag as possible, then be prepared for an Open experience that's very close to solo. :D
 

Bacalao

Bacalao
Crimson Kaim said:
Oh, and pwetty pwease. If one commander is near the station, I want to see him, regardless of his location, skill level or whatnot. No more than one instance per location please. Let's say until September?
Click to expand...
Do you know how long you'd be waiting for a docking slot at a CG? Hope you like to hear "docking request denied".
 

RoadRunner

R
Crimson Kaim said:
An alternative would be ofcourse a proper server. Big games like EVE online, League of Legends World of Tanks/Planes/Ships all use a server architecture if I am not mistaken. :(
Click to expand...

FD could move to a server/client setup instead of the current P2P architecture, but then the cost of hosting the servers would rocket and we would have a monthly subscription based game instead of what we have now which, in the long run, is significantly cheaper all round for them and us. It's all well and good quoting the way other games like EVE work, but that has been running for well over 10 years now and it far more mature. It effectively uses a super-computer farm running a 200 node SQL cluster (yes, that's 200 separate servers) just to keep it all running on a single shard, which is essentially what you're asking for in ED. On top of all this, they STILL have issues with lag when big battles are happening to the point where they have had to introduce time-dilation (dropping the frame rate of the game and thus increasing the processing time they have for each turn on the servers) to make the game playable when lots of people are in the same place. With a twitch based, real-time, game like ED, achieving a single-shard universe on today's internet architecture is completely impossible. If you disagree, then I'm sorry, but you really have no idea how basic networking functions, let alone the something as complex as the Internet, P2P and ED.

Sure, there are several areas of the networking model that could be improved in ED to make the multiplayer experience better, but moving to a server/client based setup really, really, isn't one of them IMO.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom