Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Ble

Your game can't handle a siege of 50-60??

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Ble said:

Are important things such as the ability to be logged into the game during PvP scheduled for before or after Frostweaver?  Just checkin.  I know its alot to ask.

I fear without input from ACE one can only assume their 'major performance upgrades' did not work as planned. If they couldn't address the issue after putting the majority of the team and some of the folks tasks to work on the 'artisan engine' then I don't think they can ever improve performance. If that is the case and the Dev team know this, I would expect them to add as much PvE content as they can and launch something, anything in order to help promote their artisan engine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There's so many abilities and interactions that dont work or are bad/have always been bad before we even get to stability of the game.  They continually show me that they do not have a grasp on the fundamentals of their game.  It's very frustrating.  I wonder how long this game can continue simply on it being a fantastic idea.

Edited by Ble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, Ble said:

There's so many abilities and interactions that dont work or are bad/have always been bad before we even get to stability of the game.  They continually show me that they do not have a grasp on the fundamentals of their game.  It's very frustrating.  I wonder how long this game can continue simply on it being a fantastic idea.

Sadly 100% agree Ble, I've been really enjoying my time, and been trying to give the Devs as much slack as possible since I started playing a few months ago (was aware of original kickstarter, didn't end up backing because of reasons) but tonight kinda killed my high for the game. The server cap of 2500 is pretty cruel joke if it can't handle 50 people and 6 catapults.

I find myself and my guildies (all of which bought several accounts each after our first 10 hours of play because we loved the game) being severely disappointed by the actual nature of sieges. Between the Banetree bug currently, the Siege window being at a wonk time (6pm pst, right when people are getting off work / wanting to eat dinner?) and other things Crowfall is definitely starting to seem like little more than a fantastic idea.

Will definitely hang around and watch progress, game is stupid fun when you have those high moments but they're too far and few in-between.

Edited by SmallWaves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Spunky said:

The problem is the servers themselves. looks like its hosted  on aws atm. and with better servers should be fine

So very wrong. Even if this game ran on Deep Blue it would not matter. They used unity. enough said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mystafyi said:

So very wrong. Even if this game ran on Deep Blue it would not matter. They used unity. enough said. 

Yeah unity wasnt the best choice for this kind of game.


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, veeshan said:

Yeah unity wasnt the best choice for this kind of game.

to be fair, they could have wrote the whole backend like CU did, this could gain them significant performance gains. The other issue is unity client, not only is it a hackfest, it also has lag issues. The hacking can be alleviated by having more server checks (increases lag). Its just all around the worst decision ACE made, but in 2015 when they changed engines, who knows what other issues they had to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mystafyi said:

They used unity. enough said. 

Do gamers really still think game engines impact player experience instead of developer experience? I mean yes, if they were just using the features of an engine completely stock without customizing anything, sure! If that's your personal experience with game development messing around in unity after school, or if you're only familiar with the lazier indie games out there, I could see how you'd be worried, but these devs have a little more experience than that.

Here's a rundown; basically, if an engine's out of the box experience doesn't support something that's required, the devs can make it themselves. If an engine does support something but it does it in a way that doesn't really suit the needs of the project, the devs can use what works, scrap what doesn't and remake it til it fits their needs, which saves a little time. If an engine does offer some solution that works fine, then the devs don't have to reinvent the wheel and can just tweak things which saves a lot of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RandomNPC said:

Do gamers really still think game engines impact player experience instead of developer experience? I mean yes, if they were just using the features of an engine completely stock without customizing anything, sure! If that's your personal experience with game development messing around in unity after school, or if you're only familiar with the lazier indie games out there, I could see how you'd be worried, but these devs have a little more experience than that.

Here's a rundown; basically, if an engine's out of the box experience doesn't support something that's required, the devs can make it themselves. If an engine does support something but it does it in a way that doesn't really suit the needs of the project, the devs can use what works, scrap what doesn't and remake it til it fits their needs, which saves a little time. If an engine does offer some solution that works fine, then the devs don't have to reinvent the wheel and can just tweak things which saves a lot of time.

If you take a turd and polish it, it’s still a turd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ive always said that using unity would be the biggest problem, ive never played Rust but considering most other survival games have a rough limit of 50 players per server i would imagine its the same for that? and Albion Online struggled when 50 players fighting each other at release, seems a bit of a trend with the number 50. 

Daoc could handle big battles inside keeps, i think the biggest i was involved in was around 200-250 players in a playable state and ive heard reports of that CU was having more than that on their tests using their own engine, why oh why didn't Ace use an engine that was proven to take the strain of big battles? unity to me is mainly used for mobile and single players games. I do however think performance has slightly improved recently but that could be a fact that there are far fewer players playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

While Unity may play some factor in an individual’s experience performance wise, it’s more likely the main performance problems are the typical issues of action combat causing server communication problems. 

This is why shooters like the battlefield games typically top out around 64 players due to the network overhead, not because something can or can’t be rendered. Tab targeting is one of the systems used to decrease that communication overheard thus increasing number of players supported by a server node, which is why many MMOs use it.

EVE’s combat system is similar and one of the reasons that game can support large numbers of players - to a point, it still breaks. They even introduced time dilation to push that limit a bit further out, there the server slows down the tic rate of messages so everything feels like slow motion but the interface is still usable.

We also don’t know what sort of hardware is currently running the pre-alpha. If they’ve downscaled it due to less players then the relative performance difference would be difficult to detect for us, would need more info to determine. (I don’t think they did this but it’s possible explanation)

Edited by Duffy

lPoLZtm.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unity is a bad engine.  there is another newer game I played that only just released in the last year or so that uses unity and those devs have come straight out and said the choice to use unity was a bad one.  I also feel that game the devs for that game were more open and transparent than these folks are being during the testing phase and beyond.  I was never left to wonder what was going on, what is coming down the shoot, etc etc but with these folks I will be frank.  I never really know what is going on and I am left to wonder a lot.  The difference is quite stark.  black and white really and I much prefer that other game approach with their complete transparency... my two sense but ya, unity sucks.  :)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Duffy said:

While Unity may play some factor in an individual’s experience performance wise, it’s more likely the main performance problems are the typical issues of action combat causing server communication problems. 

For single player games and instanced games that can keep the player counts lower, unity is fine. For a game that is based upon pvp and large scale combat, unity is not currently feasible and unity's own network lead dev have said as much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Kianna_RuneMaker said:

there is another newer game I played that only just released in the last year or so that uses unity and those devs have come straight out and said the choice to use unity was a bad one.

Albion online devs and rend devs have both spoken out about unity being a mistake. I am sure ACe will join that list after launch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my experience with games like this such as darkfall, Albion and all that if your engine cant play with 200 or so players on the field at a time your gonna have issues. I hope they can figure out how to make that happen but it gonna be hard with unity from what ive seen.

I will say this though i rather a game with say runescape graphics than can run 300 or so people on the field at once then one that looks amazing but struggles with 50 😛 


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using an out dated (“comfort”) engine seems to be a trend. Never played SB but from my understanding the engine was an issue there too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...