FC2 Online

[c0ff]

Network code was multithreaded from the start.

The simulation code was and still is not.

Edited September 15, 2010 by c0ff
fixed typo

[GGTharos]

Aha - my mistake.

[Steel Jaw]

Aha - my mistake.

 

You were quick to fess up to your error: you must be married. :D

[GGTharos]

I'm not :P

 

You were quick to fess up to your error: you must be married. :D

[Steel Jaw]

I'm not :P

 

Well then at least you're ready. :megalol:

[G3]

immediate denial, excellent, he is ready :D

[159th_Viper]

.....you must be married. :D

 

Hey - don't knock it! It's all Good :D

 

[Steel Jaw]

Marital...

 

Bliss..

 

Oppposing concepts...to a gamer/simmer.

[104th_Crunch]

Renato, good discussion still, but GG is right. PC hardware will always move forward. I would not want a developer to make a sim and take away things so it can be played on old hardware. My PC components are mostly 2 years old! At least there are options to turn down the graphics.

 

Still, I sympathize with you. Things are not even in every part of the world and for many upgrading their PC is simply not possible. I guess the best you may be able to do without upgrading is stick with older sims. I don't think you can blame the developers though as they must move ahead. There is no question, however, that FC2 could use more work in the MP area, but as well all now resources are limited and ED do the best they can. Still, we need to make them aware.

[Renato71]

I guess that I have put too many words into describing hardware, that my major concerns got lost or ignored.

those are:

- how come that multiplayer is presenting more and more playbility problems?

- how come that many good things were thrown out?

- how come that all advices are oriented toward "you're having a problem", or "its your problem", "you have to fix this and that", or "go play with yourself", and so on...?

- how come that graphical setting on server can influence clients so much and its connection with them?

 

I was not talking about singleplayer issues.

 

FC2 runs just fine in SP on my PC at medium settings.

 

but, each and every time I join any public server that either has more then 10 players or a large number of vehicles, I get lagging in best case, and in most cases game stutters until full freeze.

and, its not only a problem of mine. all are experience significant performance drops on servers with large number of players or vehicles.

 

please, no more silly questions or advice along the line of "change your net setting from lan to dsl" and similar nonsense. I'm not that big nincompoop that I'm not able to change and/or experiment with such settings or to advice other to do the same.

 

net code sucks. there is too much data going in and out that PC itself gets chocked up.

why is it that my PC - as a client - has to calculate is something 100km away is visible or not? that should be done by server and server should send me "only visible" data.

 

why is it that I see civilian traffic when I turned that off? it is choking my bandwidth and my CPU.

 

I will not spend any 2 cents or alike on false promises, like I did when I kept second LCD monitor instead of selling it when I had a chance, or buying stuff for LOSIOC and anything alike, just on account that only cheating protection is from the age of Spanish Inquisition.

 

 

but, most of all I'm pissed at myself for wasting my time and money on something that evolved into something that is hoarded by hardware elite and blind worshipers.

yes, thats it - I'm pissed cos I supported something, and now those people are pissign and my poormans hardware and situation.

just because someone is too lazy or of too high opinion about himself to take any criticism.

 

go play something older...

go play with yourself...

 

you should use that as promotional text.

 

 

jeez, what a waste of time!

[159th_Viper]

......and now those people are pissign and my poormans hardware and situation.

just because someone is too lazy or of too high opinion about himself to take any criticism.

 

go play something older...

go play with yourself...

 

you should use that as promotional text.

 

 

jeez, what a waste of time!

 

Struggling to reconcile the attitude with a valued member of the community.......Be that as it may, I am not going to attempt to confirm that I understand your point-of-view.

 

What I am struggling with is the righteous indignation emanating from many forum individuals of late (not limited to this issue alone) with regard to various issues. It's the 'I want it and I want it now and by gawd I'll toss my toys until I get it!' attitude that I find most disconcerting. Has it not occured to those persons concerned that the relevant issues might have been recognised and will be dealt with accordingly/insofar as the code allows when resources can be allocated to the specific task?

 

I just wish a little patience could be brought to bear by all. There's a good reason why honey is preferred to vinegar when it comes to catching flies!

 

**Disclaimer: At the risk of repeating myself (and wishing I could post under a nom de plume under these circumstances), views expressed are mine and mine alone.

[GhostDog]

I just wish a little patience could be brought to bear by all. There's a good reason why honey is preferred to vinegar when it comes to catching flies!

 

**Disclaimer: At the risk of repeating myself (and wishing I could post under a nom de plume under these circumstances), views expressed are mine and mine alone.

 

Six years of waiting is pretty patient I think. A dedicated server is a standard feature that ED has inexplicably never seen fit to include during the lifetime of the series. Limited resources doesn't seem to be a sufficient explanation for this. In general, ED seems to be slow to draw lessons from the multiplayer aspect of other games and gaming genres.

[nomdeplume]

why is it that I see civilian traffic when I turned that off? it is choking my bandwidth and my CPU.

 

Because that's a mission setting, and it wouldn't make sense to have some clients seeing different things than others. I would agree that most missions, especially those played on public servers, ought to have civilian traffic disabled. But I don't think it entirely makes sense for this to be a client-side setting. The vibe of the mission may well depend on civilian 'targets' being present, and said traffic needs to be synchronised amongst all clients.

 

To play devil's advocate to this whole thread: how many people actually play the game online? I really think any time spent on the multiplayer aspect is time spent on a niche segment of a niche market. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the only reason the game even supports multiplayer is because the developers and testers are huge multiplayer-fans, and it was more a case of a "labour of love" than a carefully-considered business decision.

 

I have dabbled in the multiplayer in both Black Shark and Flaming Cliffs 2, and from my perspective it's a bit like the Arma series: awesome if you play with a like-minded squad, but pretty pointless if you're just playing on public servers with randoms. Since I don't have the inclination to commit to a squad, that means multiplayer in these games is basically a non-starter. For me, time ED spends improving the AI is vastly more valuable than time spent improving the online experience.

 

Maybe some things could be done to help public server play more worthwhile, such as providing tasks to players so that everyone always knows exactly what they're supposed to be doing to assist their team, and integrated voice comms could be a boon. And of course the lack of a dedicated server is a major impediment to good online support. But all that takes lots of time to develop and test, and I'm not really sure it'll solve the underlying problem: it requires a fair bit of time commitment and a lot of people just don't want to, or are unable to, make that commitment.

 

Somewhat more on-topic: in the times I have played online, even on fairly busy servers I've never had unplayable games, despite the fact that the servers are always located on a faraway continent with at least 200ms latency. Sure planes jump around in an immersion-breaking fashion, but it doesn't stop the game being playable.

[c0ff]

Personally, I'd like to see more threads like this one.

Hopefully, it will influence priorities and resource allocation.

[c0ff]

- how come that multiplayer is presenting more and more playbility problems?

The attention it gets is not enough.

 

- how come that many good things were thrown out?

You either have resources to support and develop "good things" or you throw them out. Do not underestimate the need support a working thing. The moment you change something in a working system is the moment you start fixing the rest.

 

- how come that all advices are oriented toward "you're having a problem", or "its your problem", "you have to fix this and that", or "go play with yourself", and so on...?

I suppose, sims lean toward elitist societies.

 

- how come that graphical setting on server can influence clients so much and its connection with them?

Because server runs graphics and simulation in the same thread. Why it still the same in 2010? Because those who are capable to change it are allocated to other tasks.

[c0ff]

All in all, you vote with your wallet.

[InFireBaptize]

Because server runs graphics and simulation in the same thread. Why it still the same in 2010? Because those who are capable to change it are allocated to other tasks.

 

Hi c0ff, what other tasks? the A-10C, i don't want it, i would rather you spend resources on something you have already built and paid for by customers. If you can't keep up then focus on tasks at hand, i.e BS and FC2.0.

 

A good example is Bohemia Interactive, they're continuously producing beta patches for the community to test, at least they're fixing their game.

[GGTharos]

Hi c0ff, what other tasks? the A-10C, i don't want it, i would rather you spend resources on something you have already built and paid for by customers. If you can't keep up then focus on tasks at hand, i.e BS and FC2.0.

 

I don't think whether you want A-10C or not matters. There is no other way to make money than to create new product, and there is no possibility to patch anything without money. Frankly, I think they should just forget about LO/FC and focus on DCS.

 

A good example is Bohemia Interactive, they're continuously producing beta patches for the community to test, at least they're fixing their game.

Oh, and BI has fixed ALL the things people are complaining about? Yes? Oh wait, look at their forums, it looks like ... no, there's still stuff people are complaining about since OFP.

BI may have the luxury of fixing things as they continue patching their engine; they might even have enough devs to do such a thing specifically. ED has different priorities, and different resources.

[Steel Jaw]

Hi c0ff, what other tasks? the A-10C, i don't want it, i would rather you spend resources on something you have already built and paid for by customers. If you can't keep up then focus on tasks at hand, i.e BS and FC2.0.

 

Dude, you're waaay off base.

 

What else is there to do with FC2? It's a lite weight success.

 

BS? A hardcore success.

 

Time to move on.

 

This community has been waiting for over a decade for a worthy A10. Dunno where you've been. Ever since the Janes A10c crashed and burned (as was betrayed by EA BTW) we have been waiting.

[104th_Crunch]

 

To play devil's advocate to this whole thread: how many people actually play the game online? I really think any time spent on the multiplayer aspect is time spent on a niche segment of a niche market. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the only reason the game even supports multiplayer is because the developers and testers are huge multiplayer-fans, and it was more a case of a "labour of love" than a carefully-considered business decision.

 

True, a small part of total customers actually play online, but that does not mean things should stay that way. Just because something is a certain way does not mean they should carry on like that with no innovation. Obviously multiplayer is a huge segment of PC gaming if you look at the rest of the market.

[InFireBaptize]

I don't think whether you want A-10C or not matters. There is no other way to make money than to create new product, and there is no possibility to patch anything without money. Frankly, I think they should just forget about LO/FC and focus on DCS.

 

Oh, and BI has fixed ALL the things people are complaining about? Yes? Oh wait, look at their forums, it looks like ... no, there's still stuff people are complaining about since OFP.

BI may have the luxury of fixing things as they continue patching their engine; they might even have enough devs to do such a thing specifically. ED has different priorities, and different resources.

 

And you think money will keep coming if they keep pushing unfinished products! I hate to say it but no more clicking the *buy* button until i research your products.

 

I don't want to talk about BI in details in this post because it's off topic and i don't want to distract from original subject but i know exactly that i would support BI 100% because i know in the end the deliver.

[c0ff]

Hi c0ff, what other tasks? the A-10C, i don't want it, i would rather you spend resources on something you have already built and paid for by customers. If you can't keep up then focus on tasks at hand, i.e BS and FC2.0.

 

A good example is Bohemia Interactive, they're continuously producing beta patches for the community to test, at least they're fixing their game.

 

Have you ever thought, why ED have no competition? Where are Janes, Falcons, even Fighter Ops?

They are gone. And we are talking on ED Forums.

 

Modern combat jets are extremely complex objects to simulate. The simulator is required to have a rich environment, complex mission planning tools. And being a modern game, it requires to have some non-trivial level of graphics. Multiplayer code have to deal with extremely fast moving objects and big network delays at the same time. Sound engine should deal with vast open spaces, hundreds of sound sources. And so on.

We even do not have an option to buy a technology. Nobody produces commercial grade libraries which will fit into a flight simulator. However we use many utility libraries (mostly open-source ones).

 

And in the end the product will be bought by a relatively small number of people.

 

Game studios, who use much more simpler technologies and licensed game engines, will consider our sales figures an epic fail.

 

That's why.

[Steel Jaw]

I hate to see lack of appreciation of devs doing their best in a nice market.

[InFireBaptize]

Dude, you're waaay off base.

 

What else is there to do with FC2? It's a lite weight success.

 

BS? A hardcore success.

 

Time to move on.

 

This community has been waiting for over a decade for a worthy A10. Dunno where you've been. Ever since the Janes A10c crashed and burned (as was betrayed by EA BTW) we have been waiting.

 

To each his own Mower, i have not been waiting for A10. There is a lot to do with FC2.0 if played online with group of pilots along the BS.

[Steel Jaw]

There is a lot to do with FC2.0 if played online with group of pilots along the BS.

 

Yes there is.

 

I am on the FC2 servers alot, mainly the 104th, as Bramage.

 

But FC2 is a lite weight retread, been there done that (it's just LOMAC with window dressing for Gawds sake).

 

The A10C is going to alter the markerplace.