Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
captcrayon

UE4? Effect players per server?

11 posts in this topic

So I noticed that the rats want to take this whole game into UE4 (Unreal Engine 4).  It's a beautiful engine and really brings in graphics and new tools into this game, but I'm very worried about this path.  I have played games that have used UE4, mostly a game called squad and their WW2 equivalent coming soon, both of which use unreal engine 4.  What I noticed is that they have a HARD time trying trying up to get 100 players to be in one server (50v50), which is a lot of players, but they can only do 40v40 for now.

 

WWII Online can hold up to 4,000 players max with the old engine they are using now, I just want to know how they plan on keeping that SAME amount of players they can fit now into Unreal engine 4?  Unreal Engine 4 seems to completely destroy the numbers WWII Online has now for players per server.

WWII Online is different from many video games because they can hold so many players in first person.  WWII Online battles can be MASSIVE in size unlike any other FPS game I have ever played.  I'm just VERY worried the rats have forgotten what WWII Online is suppose to be and pretty graphics is not really the answer.  I just see Unreal Engine 4 destroying that 4,000 players a server right down to barely 100.    I would just like to know why the rats really want to use this engine and how they plan on, if they even are, keeping the numbers they have and still keeping it WWII Online the way it has always been.

 

I hope other people are a little worried about this and not just me, really hope someone comments on this.  I believe this should be discussed if any rat can comment that would be amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sure that’s one of the many things that will be something that CRS discuss when they begin to integrate things into the engine. While I’m not sure if the engine itself is what is the limiting factor or if it is the servers being able to handle the traffic, but I am sure that if it turns out that it is the engine, before CRS releases 2.0 the QA team will find out before it gets released and they’ll come up with a fix. And if they can’t find a fix, I’m sure they’ll go back to the drawing board to find a better way like they did with 1.36 which I’m glad they did instead of rushing it.

Share this post


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

So I noticed that the rats want to take this whole game into UE4 (Unreal Engine 4).  It's a beautiful engine and really brings in graphics and new tools into this game, but I'm very worried about this path.  I have played games that have used UE4, mostly a game called squad and their WW2 equivalent coming soon, both of which use unreal engine 4.  What I noticed is that they have a HARD time trying trying up to get 100 players to be in one server (50v50), which is a lot of players, but they can only do 40v40 for now.

 

WWII Online can hold up to 4,000 players max with the old engine they are using now, I just want to know how they plan on keeping that SAME amount of players they can fit now into Unreal engine 4?  Unreal Engine 4 seems to completely destroy the numbers WWII Online has now for players per server.

WWII Online is different from many video games because they can hold so many players in first person.  WWII Online battles can be MASSIVE in size unlike any other FPS game I have ever played.  I'm just VERY worried the rats have forgotten what WWII Online is suppose to be and pretty graphics is not really the answer.  I just see Unreal Engine 4 destroying that 4,000 players a server right down to barely 100.    I would just like to know why the rats really want to use this engine and how they plan on, if they even are, keeping the numbers they have and still keeping it WWII Online the way it has always been.

 

I hope other people are a little worried about this and not just me, really hope someone comments on this.  I believe this should be discussed if any rat can comment that would be amazing.

It's its own challenge certainly but there's a couple facts to keep in mind.

1. WWIIOL 2.0 is nowhere near close to even an alpha build

2. We have no idea what the market will be for games like this when that day comes. It is true games like Hell Let Loose and Post Scriptum will beat WWIIOL in the race to a hardcore-realistic WWII game launch by a mile.

3. Moving the current population in no way would be an issue. The numbers are not large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't confuse a client application for a server.

 

most UE4 games do use the built in networking but it isn't strictly required. you could write your own networking backend that allows multiple 'cell' servers to act as one large world server. or, as the case is with this game and i'm not a rat so take this with a grain of salt .... but ... this game has had this scale out style cell host ability since 2001. back then the feature truly was WAAAY ahead of its time. i believe the thought process is to just use the UE4 client to render the world you view. the networking then, the 'server' we connect to will be the existing tech or portions of it (the message broker piece that ties cell hosts together) mated with a kick [censored] new graphics engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So true...the standard ue4 network engine uses a 48hz poll rate. This is partly because it was initially designed as a shoebox FPS shooter. Most “proper” shooters strip out the majority of the network code and make thier own.  A new engine in 2018/19 is truly a great opportunity to advance network tech. The culling alone in the ue4 engine is quite good but can be improved.

Share this post


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

I would just like to know why the rats really want to use this engine and how they plan on, if they even are, keeping the numbers they have and still keeping it WWII Online the way it has always been.

 

I hope other people are a little worried about this and not just me, really hope someone comments on this.  I believe this should be discussed if any rat can comment that would be amazing.

Yeah it's weird they have a mature product that brings in money but for some reason they keep trying to move on to something else. The current game had more players when it had less content. It even had more players after the disastrous 1.34 patches and the server was having to be reset every few days. The problem isn't their engine.

 

Modern DirectX optimization and compatibility with integrated graphics would be critical if this game was relying on F2P, but that got axed so it's not as important. The current engine being based on .flt files and having to use Presagis Creator which costs money, and the talent pool isn't anywhere near as large as UE4. But so what, competent UE4 artists cost money anyway, middleware and other software costs money and if you can't cover an annual license with your subscriber base I don't know why you would be building a whole new game from scratch like what they're saying is WW2online 2.0. Technical debt sucks, but even if you rebuild everything in a free engine like UE4 you're going to have to pay coders. Actually not just coders, but real software engineers that know what they're doing but I digress. Subs apparently aren't even covering their software licenses and they want 35 grand to continue development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

david, nobody makes middleware for Unity 1.0. And no, its the unity engine CRS made in the late 90s, not the modern Unity engine which has tons of middleware options.

 

you have a point, things cost money. however, the dollar per value ratio is going to be significantly more favorable to CRS in a market space where there is competition. Meaning, middleware targeted at UE4 competes with other middleware for UE4 driving down the costs for folks like CRS and driving up the value per dollar ratio. Further, with UE4 you can tap the "i want to be a game developer when i grow up" crowd. You can get 'free' labor with a popular engine because people are looking to add to their resume/CV.

Again, CRS isn't talking about throwing away everything they currently have. The strat system, some of the back end networking, etc will no doubt get re-used. all they're really trying to do is change out the client rendering piece. "all" as though that is trivial ... just saying.


 

p.s. having established developers attempt to build something completely unique isn't always the best choice. hiring a guy that has experience developing games isn't a bad thing mind you but often times you'll be hiring existing bias and bad habits that cost money to correct, worse, it takes time to integrate etc. Don't sleep on 'nonprofessional' talent. The video game market is now jam packed with amazing Indie titles that weren't created by established developers. If you're looking to make a CoD clone with a AAA title budget, sure, go hire these guys. these folks don't know how to claw and scratch a game into existence though - that takes a different mind set. 

 

...a mindset you're criticizing for trying. you're free to think how you like but Xoom is trying to push the ball forward as best he can with what he has. Pretty telling what kind of person you are for [censored]ting on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, madrebel said:

...a mindset you're criticizing for trying. you're free to think how you like but Xoom is trying to push the ball forward as best he can with what he has. Pretty telling what kind of person you are for [censored]ting on that.

All of your advice is bad, and you should feel bad for giving it. It's a monumental task with a small team of full-time employees and a documented codebase, let alone a mishmash of partime and volunteers working with spaghetti. And whatever production benefits they get from UE4 will be overshadowed by the fact that they're a solid two years behind other guys that are also building a realism-oriented WW2 FPS in UE4. Some of the Post Scriptum devs are former WW2online players and they specifically mention in an interview how they liked the gears and shifting in vehicles in this game, but probably wouldn't be able to implement it and will go for a simplified system instead. They're not implementing pilotable aircraft either, but they do want player logistics and supply runs and towing. They know what they want and more importantly their limitations. CRS is talking about WW2online 2.0 while still figuring out what it wants to do with the strategic system (the latest being hybrid brigades). It's important to have realistic goals and expectations. 

 

I'm going to say that building a new game in an entirely different engine at this point is a bad idea just like I said that launching on Steam as an early access title with a $15/month subscription was a bad idea. Although the OP's concern about the max player limits of UE4 is probably among the least of the problems with such a move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The limits of players per server have no link to Game Engines..

What WW2ol does is implement a system called load balancing that tracks players and assigns multi servers to manage each cluster of around 64 player Battles(players Drawn, you will never see in WW2ol 100 players being drawn in one battle when you see players pop in that means the limit of players has been achieve).. this is done in pretty much every MMO what ends happening in most multiplayer games(not MMO like Warthunder, Squad) is that you have only 1 server assign to 64ish players and their one instance of a game.

Server Meshing what SC is implementing is supposedly a better system that allows more players making use of the cloud to assign players faster and with less latency compared to WW2ol local texas server clusters.

 

TLDR: Every Major Game Engine that gives access to it's source code allows to implement this system. In WW2ol unnoticeable to you, you are constantly being kicked and added to multiple servers in order to engage with every player on the game seamless.

 

@not Original posters

The only value things current WW2ol has is the server, infrastructure, a very rough diamond of a game and the name, considering the size of the community I wouldn't put this has a value thing. WW2ol 2.0 will be the future of Worl war 2 online games but if it will be actual CRS to deliver that ... lets just say it would be a beyond monumental task.

Edited by pbveteran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2018 at 5:21 PM, captcrayon said:

WWII Online can hold up to 4,000 players max with the old engine they are using now, I just want to know how they plan on keeping that SAME amount of players they can fit now into Unreal engine 4?  Unreal Engine 4 seems to completely destroy the numbers WWII Online has now for players per server.

That would be if the game used UT as its full client and server model.
A game could use anything as it's 3d renderer, and handle all its other tasks with its own tools.
So you could have UT's renderer draw the picture and use better models and textures to do it, but you would still have WWII Online behind the screen
doing the non visual stuff.

At least that is my best understanding of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.