PDA

View Full Version : DOF servers?


zach12wqasxz
11-22-2009, 02:42 PM
how many people do you guys think, or plan, or know, will be able to play on 1 server?, how many servers do you guys plan to have? and i hope if its posible to make this game like eve-onlines servers where they have ALL there players all in 1 server, 40k + on a regular basis, this being a rts, and extremely different type of game compared to eve, would this even be possible with todays technology? obviously there would be differnt servers for different systems but say you have like 2 servers for the PC and the 360, and say you have servers in like 2 different major languages, english.....and chinese? will this be possible?

Espadachim
11-22-2009, 07:49 PM
40k players won't cause too much lag?

zach12wqasxz
11-22-2009, 08:03 PM
40k players won't cause too much lag?

well, games like world of warcraft only have like 2000 people i do beleive, ( i have never played it ), now imagine 2000 people, all with 2000 man armies, i htink it would cause some serious lag without really good servers, mmos are a bit different from rts's, now combine them, i bet there will be a lot of lag in the beta testing

Supreme
11-23-2009, 09:05 AM
It really depends on how it is organised.

bikkebakke
11-23-2009, 10:29 AM
beta testing doesn't only contain bugtesting and stuff like that, they will slowly invite people to test the servers, its probably not until a resent releasedate that they will start to throw in lots of people and by then much work should be with the servers to keep them stable.

And i dont think it would lag too much for you depending on how they make, optimize, the game, it would lag if your computer would have to load up every unit/building everyone is using, the game will probably be set up in areas, so your computer will only have to load everything in your area, and when entering a new, it will only have to think about that area, so having lots of players doesnt really matters that way, on the other hand, the DoF servers would be heavely used, but I don't really know anything about that, letting someone else answer that :P

Or maybe that was your question and i didnt really get it: How much can the DoF servers take?
If not that is my question.

nickson104
11-23-2009, 12:13 PM
If i remember rightly, there are to be a few servers, but not only that, you will only be able to see and therefore load, your neighbouring empires, allied empires, NPC cities and near where your army/armies is/are...
That will be to reduce lag... if you had to load up a whole server full of empires, towns and units... your computer would likely give up on life... :p

LiTos456
11-23-2009, 02:18 PM
You dont need 40k players on one server. They'd barely fit along the whole land. Becuase it's not just one character it's a whole city. I think 1k will be max.

Supreme
11-23-2009, 02:39 PM
Really? Wouldnt it be possible to simply have to accounts on one maplocation? Im gonna reckon all maps look similar anyway.

zach12wqasxz
11-23-2009, 03:58 PM
Really? Wouldnt it be possible to simply have to accounts on one maplocation? Im gonna reckon all maps look similar anyway.

what would happen if 1 guy conqured like half the land? would that mean the servers would be able to hold less people. because there is less land to go around? or will te land just get bigger till the servers are full?

Josh Warner
11-23-2009, 04:49 PM
You don't conquer land, and the only things that are marked on the world map are NPC cities, your own city and targets. You don't see anyone else's city on the world map. It's rather difficult to explain if you haven't read up on the mechanics of the MMO portion of the game.

Whether everything ends up on one server or not, you'll have to wait for kon or someone to answer. That's not something I work on so I'm not sure what their plan is. But remember, all battles are played out on their own maps, the world map is there for matchmaking and quests, not for actually singling out targets. It's not going to have a little dot for every player city, just your own - possibly allies - NPC cities - and quest markers will be represented on it.

Darathor
11-23-2009, 05:12 PM
I heard it explained earlier that everything was basically instanced, so it doesn't matter how many guys are on a server. Everything would be instanced into its own thing.

lonewolf9567
01-08-2010, 09:30 PM
because this is an rts id think like in the hundreds

LiTos456
01-08-2010, 10:50 PM
Nah, they said a thousand at max I think.

Justin
01-10-2010, 01:38 PM
The problem with only a thousand players max is for a game like this where i believe you can only attack other players that are online there would never be very many people online. Even on an online game with a monthly subscription, from personal experience i would say less than half of the people are online on a weekly basis. Which would lead to not very many people to have pvp fights on at any given time.

Darathor
01-10-2010, 01:40 PM
All the areas, like your city, will be instanced. This allows for all the players to be on one server due to everything being instanced in its own little place.

frankein_fish
01-19-2010, 12:02 PM
And btw EVE runs on several nodes where one node handles one solar system (Depends on how populated they are)

Darvin
01-20-2010, 08:45 PM
It's entirely possible that everyone could play on one server. Most of the DoF's MMO mode appears to be instanced anyways.

One of the biggest questions is the matter of synchronization. The traditional RPG sync methods probably won't scale to RTS levels, but using the traditional RTS sync method would mean you'd have minimal defenses against cheaters. How they handle sync almost certainly will determine their server structure, and I'm curious as to what technical direction they took.

Swift sword
01-20-2010, 09:37 PM
There's no way there'd be 40k players on one server- even on MMO's such as WoW, where you command a single character, there isn't 40k players on a server. Granted, most of it is instanced, and not all of the cities are shown, but I still can't see there being that many people on a single server without mass lag. I'm more curious as to how many players there will actually be. I mean, there certainly isn't going to be 40k people on at one time...right? ;)
I'm guessing 1000, maybe less, per server. I kind of doubt there will ever be more than 1000 players on a single server at one time. But, that's just me. I' quite capable of being wrong about many, many things, you know ;)

Darvin
01-21-2010, 12:24 AM
Alright, this isn't going to be World of Warcraft. Even presuming that DoF is an awesome game that's very successful (which I hope it is), it can't hope to have a comparable player base. World of Warcraft was the perfect storm of the right developers making the right game at precisely the right time. Dawn of Fantasy, on the other hand, is coming from a new developer, will have to compete with Starcraft II for RTS fans, and its genre is new and experimental. Let's be serious here: 40k people online at once is a pipe dream. DoF would have to be one of the highest selling PC games of all-time to even have a shot at this.

Remember, most people are singleplayer only gamers. Even in MMO's, the vast majority of gamers avoid human contact and would prefer an offline mode if it were available. The vast majority of people who buy DoF will never touch online mode, and only a small fraction of those who do will stick around for the long-run. It may be that we only have 1000-4000 people online at peak hours.

Secondly, the MMO term for "server" and the literal term diverge a little. In reality, one server is not managed by a single machine, but rather a network of custom-built machines. So in reality, one server is actually a network of servers in and of itself. The real question is how Reverie is building their server system.

It may be that from the user's perspective, there is only one "server". This is not to say that there is only one machine managing everything, but rather that all of these machines are part of a coherent network and are indistinguishable to the user. How Reverie decides to build their architecture will determine what it looks like in the end.

Unen
01-21-2010, 08:00 PM
well, games like world of warcraft only have like 2000 people i do beleive, ( i have never played it ), now imagine 2000 people, all with 2000 man armies, i htink it would cause some serious lag without really good servers, mmos are a bit different from rts's, now combine them, i bet there will be a lot of lag in the beta testing
There's no way there'd be 40k players on one server- even on MMO's such as WoW, where you command a single character, there isn't 40k players on a server.

Wow servers range from 1k to 38k players. At least thats according to wow census. EX http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php?serverid=749
You also have to take in account the mass amounts of profit blizzard makes which enables them to easily have servers able to handle that.

Darvin
01-21-2010, 09:54 PM
The difference in playerbase and income between Reverie and Blizzard is one thing, but I think more important is to look at the underlying game. I do not think it's feasible to scale up a conventional MMORPG server system to deal with the size of a MMORTS. If it is possible, there are some cunning optimizations running in the background, but I somehow doubt it.

In a RPG, there is essentially a master server with a master state. If someone cheats to forcibly alter the game state, then the master server will detect a desync and "correct" this state. Barring some sort of bug (many older engines, such as Diablo II, can enter invalid game-states or timestamps that allow you to break the rules) this is very difficult to cheat. The problem is, someone needs to be the dedicated master server, and in a MMO that has to be "the server".

That system is simply too inefficient for a RTS. The entire game-state needs to be analyzed and resent fairly regularly. That's doable with a RPG, but in a RTS the gamestate can be hundreds or even thousands of times larger, so it's harder to detect a desync and harder to repair it. Unless Reverie has some cunning optimizations, I don't think this is feasible at all.


More likely is that the servers will take a hands-off approach, doing little more than keeping tabs on where you are and what you're doing. This would be far less intensive (per player) than a regular MMO. The problem with this is that you could easily cheat while the servers weren't looking. Now, there are ways to work around that. My approach would be a simple audit. Have each player's instance leave a simplified paper trail of data, which the server can sniff through for anomalies. If something doesn't smell right, it does a full audit of the player, silently watching the gamestate and waiting to catch the player in the act of cheating. Not foolproof, but it would work.

Pilgrim
01-22-2010, 05:59 AM
Alright, this isn't going to be World of Warcraft. Even presuming that DoF is an awesome game that's very successful (which I hope it is), it can't hope to have a comparable player base. World of Warcraft was the perfect storm of the right developers making the right game at precisely the right time. Dawn of Fantasy, on the other hand, is coming from a new developer, will have to compete with Starcraft II for RTS fans, and its genre is new and experimental. Let's be serious here: 40k people online at once is a pipe dream. DoF would have to be one of the highest selling PC games of all-time to even have a shot at this.

Remember, most people are singleplayer only gamers. Even in MMO's, the vast majority of gamers avoid human contact and would prefer an offline mode if it were available. The vast majority of people who buy DoF will never touch online mode, and only a small fraction of those who do will stick around for the long-run. It may be that we only have 1000-4000 people online at peak hours.

Secondly, the MMO term for "server" and the literal term diverge a little. In reality, one server is not managed by a single machine, but rather a network of custom-built machines. So in reality, one server is actually a network of servers in and of itself. The real question is how Reverie is building their server system.

It may be that from the user's perspective, there is only one "server". This is not to say that there is only one machine managing everything, but rather that all of these machines are part of a coherent network and are indistinguishable to the user. How Reverie decides to build their architecture will determine what it looks like in the end.

Thanks for the reality check!
To be honest, Reverie. is putting an impressive amount of effort into a revolutionary multiplayer considering the company's own realistic player forecast.