Theoretically, they could indeed. But that would probably either mean that they would need two separate teams to develop and run Elite or each galaxy as the two would inevitably diverge and would certainly require different feature to be added, modified or bug-fixed , or there would have to be some way to keep the two galaxies in sync and all the attendant problems that would entail.In theory, FD could offer a seperate galaxy, open only, with a client/server architecture.
I'm wondering what the subscription costs for it would be like to pay for the cost of reworking the engine to work with C/S and to maintain the global network necessary for it.
I do hope those who want this have deep pockets. Its not going to be cheap. Might want to speak to FD about the development and operational costs for this and how you are going to fund it. Hmm... perhaps FD could start selling ships for real money to fund it.
What i don't want is FD wasting their own money on this and diverting resources that to my mind would be better spent on a whole range of other features. Its not just networking devs, it would be devops people, management, QA.
The year is 2020 and Elite Dangerous is still P2P. Let's discuss PvE and PvP servers.
- Thread starter Sir Ganksalot
- Start date
Hence what i said about costs.
This. If the PvP community as a whole were saying, "those seal clubbers in Deciat are obnoxious and we disown them", the rest of us could take them more seriously. Instead they usually just close ranks. Then it's understandable for people outside to take the same view of all of them, even if it's not entirely accurate.
In theory, FD could offer a seperate galaxy, open only, with a client/server architecture.
I'm wondering what the subscription costs for it would be like to pay for the cost of reworking the engine to work with C/S and to maintain the global network necessary for it.
I do hope those who want this have deep pockets. Its not going to be cheap. Might want to speak to FD about the development and operational costs for this and how you are going to fund it. Hmm... perhaps FD could start selling ships for real money to fund it.
What i don't want is FD wasting their own money on this and diverting resources that to my mind would be better spent on a whole range of other features. Its not just networking devs, it would be devops people, management, QA.
They already have a client/server architecture though
Peer to Peer just handles the "twitch" stuff, the reasons why there aren't "dedicated" hosted instances are very well explained throught the thread. There is no finite amount of required servers as the number of possible instances is unknown at any time.
"In theory" the operating costs would exceed just about everything else out there even if you could get past the tech challenges of offering a nice dedicated hosted instance in your region for whatever purpose and moving between instances also in your region (in wings, stumbling across players while exploring/mining/res zones etc) as you move around the galaxy.
Last edited:
Yup.
The servers they have don't require low latency. I suspect relatively cheap to run. But yes, you're right about that. When people call ED P2P they are a bit wrong, its hybrid.
But you seem to be talking about regional instances, which would separate the playerbase even more than modes do. I think that wouldn't go down well, especially with groups that are global in scope.
I dont know if its been said already but...
Solo/private=pve
Open=pvp
There, done. Next?
Solo/private=pve
Open=pvp
There, done. Next?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not quite.
Both multi-player modes are PvP enabled. Some consider BGS activities (which transcend game modes), e.g. affecting Factions (that may be supported by other players) to be PvP, albeit indirect.
The addition of an Open-PvE mode (where in-the-same-instance PvP was impossible) would probably be appreciated by a subset of the player-base though.
Regional instances for twitch gameplay (player interaction) the amount of real-time telemetry data passed around for combat simulation is not going to happen on some "single shard" centralised server. I know that dual universe has some comprimises that also wouldn't work when it comes to what players are used to with ED when it comes to PvP.
The entire game would need to be re-designed, either to be much smaller with a set of constant known areas for twitch gameplay OR simply provide some pseudo alternative to that kind of real time gameplay, such as command & control as with EvE. I doubt the player base would be very happy about massively cutting down the galaxy, and that doesn't even guarantee that you suddenly have a decent multiplayer experience. I can think of one previously mentioned perpetually developed space game that still offers a single instance server and locks the framerate to it. I guess Frontier could just use a term like "Alpha" and shove one system up and talk about what might be possible one day.
Last edited:
Nope.
Solo - no other players
Private - a select number of players, usually friends
Open - everyone
Open being the most social mode.
PVP is a minority subset of social, the subset that includes mostly trigger happy people, but not only.
A fair definition. The modes & blocklist as implemented filter players, not activities.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If that's the case then the PR is accurate - and unappealing, I would expect, to a not insignificant subset of the player-base.Well, most pvpers are gankers as well so
Last edited:
It attracts players too.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Of course - whether it attracts more than it puts off is unknown.
Noting that those put off Open by such players don't need to stop playing the game to avoid them, at least some of those attracted to the game by the ability to attack other players for no reason, little risk to their CMDR when doing so or much in the way of consequences after having done so seem to be rather put out that those they may wish to attack don't need to play with them to continue to enjoy playing the game and affecting the single shared galaxy.
I don’t think there is a ‘pvp community’ as such, just a loose conglomerate of players who mostly choose open and range from no actual combat at all to those that mostly do combat, and most of those go mining as well, so how should we ‘close ranks’ exactly? The point here is that most of the players that prefer pvp contact are fairly non judgemental about the whole ganking issue, personally I see it as a welcome chance to test myself and my ship, even though I have no desire to gank myself.
The game played alone (ie what solo is for), or with friends (ie what groups are for) works just fine. If you want to meet strangers (what Open is for) some of them might be better at playing than you, have better equipment than you, and might decide to shoot at you.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Quite.
In some cases it's as if encountered players are playing the game with an entirely different focus.
One vote no
