Some MMO are going the route of having single server, while others may have multiple servers. I was wondering, but what's the downside to single server worlds, that make many developers go with the multiple-server model?
this such as a Cross server LFG tool wouldn't be needed if MMO games were more single server structure, you agree? So what's the deal behind it?
If you think Orgrimmar is crowded now, can you imagine millions of toons there?
Single Server MMO == you can have at most 10,000 players total online at any time.
What you could do is seamless server traversal. Meaning up to 10,000 players can enter any area, which would then be controlled by a single server. Once you switch areas, you might switch the server in the background as well.
Servers would have to dynamically reallocate areas in order to assure that no server must handle too many players, and the gameworld would have to be dynamically generated because it would need to be large enough to handle possibly millions of players.
Because innovation and experimentation is dead. Even something as simple as experimenting with servers is "too risky" for modern day MMO "designers".
Why don't you go ahead and help with innovation then? you surely seem like the guy who knows what to do.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6. US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian. Subs will be so low there is no need for more Snoocky-How many servers? The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
What would be the primary language would you use for talking in game? English, spanish, german, or chinesse so that peopel could actually talk and play together. Moving the servers to a loal area nearby is also nice in that you localize the game text t the area so everyone knwos what the other is saying.
It's mainly that the benefits of being really massive aren't really that clear. At 4-6 players, I get the sensation of being part of a team. That's great, I love team games. But beyond about 8 players, the sensation of being part of a team doesn't increase much, but my contribution becomes noticeably more diluted.
I think the key is that massive games need to reward personal contribution in PVE gameplay. 40-man raids in WOW were really dissatisfying to consistently watch 2-3 players hamstring the raid's progress. It wasn't fun for me, and it probably wasn't fun for them (that guild was pretty damn casual, but knowing you screwed up and held back everyone's progress isn't a great feeling.) So the do-or-die boss fights where a few players can trip things up don't work so well. Better to have accomplishments along a spectrum, with the raid being rewarded accordingly.
At least that's how massive PVP has worked for me. When I kill 20 or 30 players in Planetside, firstly it makes a difference because population is balanced (200 vs. 200) and those kills really help my team push forward. And secondly I'm rewarded with accelerated advancement by killing a lot of them. Which is pretty important when your personal contribution towards team victory is watered down to 1/64th (playing a lot of Battlefield 3 lately) or 1/200th (Planetside.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
there's this thing on the internet that effects the performance of online gaming, we call it lag.
Eh, you played Planetside, so you of all people should know that's not the limiting factor. Heck I'm probably gonna give PS another quick retry on my new gaming rig, as framerate (local system performance) was always the main limiting factor in that game.
And Planetside solved the lag issue a long while back. With all the technologies nowadays I imagine we could have even better solutions.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
If you think Orgrimmar is crowded now, can you imagine millions of toons there?
Becouse of hardware and most stick to xp machine it would not work and crappy connections.
As long we don't have a internet connection like in KOREA we will never have a single server its way to laggy.
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
Single Server MMO == you can have at most 10,000 players total online at any time.
What you could do is seamless server traversal. Meaning up to 10,000 players can enter any area, which would then be controlled by a single server. Once you switch areas, you might switch the server in the background as well.
Servers would have to dynamically reallocate areas in order to assure that no server must handle too many players, and the gameworld would have to be dynamically generated because it would need to be large enough to handle possibly millions of players.
No thats not the issue. There are simply hard limits when it comes to the question about how many connections one single network host may handle.
Why don't you go ahead and help with innovation then? you surely seem like the guy who knows what to do.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6.
US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian.
Subs will be so low there is no need for more
Snoocky-How many servers?
The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
Umm yes Money is the issue:)
I never said it was the ONLY issue, but it is the main one.
It is simply not worth the costs to try to push it to the highest number, when you can save tons of money on good enough.
If you are talking about eve, then you are not thinking it through or lack knowledge about the situation.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
What would be the primary language would you use for talking in game? English, spanish, german, or chinesse so that peopel could actually talk and play together. Moving the servers to a loal area nearby is also nice in that you localize the game text t the area so everyone knwos what the other is saying.
there's this thing on the internet that effects the performance of online gaming, we call it lag.
SKYeXile
TRF - GM - GW2, PS2, WAR, AION, Rift, WoW, WOT....etc...
Future Crew - High Council. Planetside 1 & 2.
It's mainly that the benefits of being really massive aren't really that clear. At 4-6 players, I get the sensation of being part of a team. That's great, I love team games. But beyond about 8 players, the sensation of being part of a team doesn't increase much, but my contribution becomes noticeably more diluted.
I think the key is that massive games need to reward personal contribution in PVE gameplay. 40-man raids in WOW were really dissatisfying to consistently watch 2-3 players hamstring the raid's progress. It wasn't fun for me, and it probably wasn't fun for them (that guild was pretty damn casual, but knowing you screwed up and held back everyone's progress isn't a great feeling.) So the do-or-die boss fights where a few players can trip things up don't work so well. Better to have accomplishments along a spectrum, with the raid being rewarded accordingly.
At least that's how massive PVP has worked for me. When I kill 20 or 30 players in Planetside, firstly it makes a difference because population is balanced (200 vs. 200) and those kills really help my team push forward. And secondly I'm rewarded with accelerated advancement by killing a lot of them. Which is pretty important when your personal contribution towards team victory is watered down to 1/64th (playing a lot of Battlefield 3 lately) or 1/200th (Planetside.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Eh, you played Planetside, so you of all people should know that's not the limiting factor. Heck I'm probably gonna give PS another quick retry on my new gaming rig, as framerate (local system performance) was always the main limiting factor in that game.
And Planetside solved the lag issue a long while back. With all the technologies nowadays I imagine we could have even better solutions.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver