256 multi-player! Holy crap!!
- Thread starter Overlord Moo
- Start date
People just won't set up dedicated servers since it'll absolutely shit all over their bandwidth, there's no way people could connect that much. However, surely it could be possible if each game server was made up of several linked servers that shared the load? I'm not sure if that's possible, but I came up with the idea a while ago when I was thinking about the 64 player servers (I think that was on BF 1942 or something, correct me if I'm wrong or if I got the game name wrong). Simply set up a series of servers each with a limit of perhaps 16 players or something, and then link them all together. That way no one server would take the entire load of players and if one server crashed because they couldn't handle such a massive game, then at least not all the servers would go too. It doesn't have to be lag city...Inconsistancies Arise said:
Otherwise, I'm really annoyed because I have an Xbox 360, and I hate it when games come out for a particular system. Multiplatform is the way to go but some developers just don't give a damn. Besides that, the 360 was the main console before for online play, so it's unfair that us 360 users can't play this game when it obviously has the most potential for online play ever seen so far.
256 not enough 
you would only need 2 servers on each side of the world.
im guessing they are working on a new way of multiplayer.
Image that, waiting for 255 players (loading scren)
you would only need 2 servers on each side of the world.
im guessing they are working on a new way of multiplayer.
Image that, waiting for 255 players (loading scren)
Even if they do manage to solve the lag issues and enough people to fill a match, I wonder if this type of multiplayer will reduce the shelf life of this game. Games fizzle out on consoles after a couple years, causing the online user base to drop once the "next big thing" comes out, which will turn this game into a regular 16 versus 16 game, completely taking away what makes it unique. It would be fun to have this size multiplayer, but the issues that go along with it are going to be hard to overcome to make this game stick.
Data center bandwidth won't be a problem. Bear in mind news sites are streaming live feeds to thousands of people. I'm looking forward to seeing what they produce and hoping that it's not just 256 players but ringfenced into 8v8 skirmishes.Trivun said:
Compare this to BF2, which was released in 2005 and still manages to fill several servers, still has a large base of players and supports 64 players with no problem.super_smash_jesus said:
I don't think this is impossible at all, but of course that all depends on the implementation and how the developers respond to feedback from the community once it's live. BF2 is still getting updates now (1.5 beta was released on April 21st) which is why the community is still around.
256 seems so far fetch it would maybe mean 256 different values as in from 0-255
(reminds me of that ff8 joke with the guy who has 256 cats but he cant count any higher than that becasue ff has always had its number values between 0 and 255 makign a 256 value system you kinda have to be a computer nerd to get the joke at first glance >.>)
(reminds me of that ff8 joke with the guy who has 256 cats but he cant count any higher than that becasue ff has always had its number values between 0 and 255 makign a 256 value system you kinda have to be a computer nerd to get the joke at first glance >.>)
I though this as well but seeing as a) I'd not heard of it and b) they're talking about a release in 2009 and c) the latest new stories on it were in January, that doesn't matter so much.Fraught said:
It also still raises an interesting debate about the possibility Massively multiplayer FPS games in general. Personally I'd rather see it on the PC than the PS3...
I'll be amazed if they can pull this off. And if it is fun and worth it, it might be the final straw that pushes me to out and buy a PS3 to sit along side my 360.
[waits quietly for the 360 fanboys to scream, "PS3 in the same house as a 360? You traitor!"]
[waits quietly for the 360 fanboys to scream, "PS3 in the same house as a 360? You traitor!"]
Except, of course, that assumes both PS3 and 360 have the same capabilities... yet we have people like Kojima claiming the 360 could never handle MGS4, and the makers of Red Alert 3 putting in graphical enhancements they claim couldn't be done on the 360...Trivun said:
this isnt going to end well...
but i can only imagine that the servers will be able to hold 256 players, and will be populated at 30 (10 each team) while others can come and go up to 256...
but thats messy BF2142 hardly worked with 32 players per side.. gamers arnt soldiers they dont follow orders.
but i can only imagine that the servers will be able to hold 256 players, and will be populated at 30 (10 each team) while others can come and go up to 256...
but thats messy BF2142 hardly worked with 32 players per side.. gamers arnt soldiers they dont follow orders.