Cluster based server side support - What about going "massive"?

[Petko 10]

I just had some time to waste, and thought why not drop here some important development concept (in my thought it's important). I'm 95% sure that this will also end in the infinite void of the forum, but let's try.

After years for trying to have fun playing the Arma series, and after slowly lots of improvements were made in the "game-breaking" areas, like the netcode etc., I feel that the (joyful) playability of the game as a military simulator is still limited. I have lots of issues with small technical aspects of the sim, but let's drop those now, because the forum is already filled with that.

I finally realized, especially after seeing the success of DayZ, that Arma as a product was never good as a game, but only as an engine and a framework. For a game to work, you need a worked-out entertaining game concept that has a flow and stimulates the players. Even thought thousands of peoples in the community were tinkering and building thousands of missions and hundreds of mods and addons, the military sim part never really worked for me, never felt that this had a working game-flow concept. With the exception of the few thousand people who grouped in organized game communities, the multiplayer part of the game didn't work as an ad-hoc join up thing like with other games. And this is not because it tries to be realistic, or being "hard-core", just because it's not fun, it has no flow.

DayZ proved that you achieve the flow with some good concept, and you can build upon the engine to make a good game. But I don't really like zombies, I would like to get back to the military simulator concept, and the question of why did it not work (for me).

The best attempt was with project reality, which is a very well made game concept, but after some attempts I still felt that this is far from a war simulator. I waited for more people to join up the server until I played with 100 players but still then it didn't seem like a war simulation because of the lack of a real frontline. I always tried to relive the moment I had with Planetside which even though had an arcade like shooter mechanic, always felt like a real war simulator with frontlines and organized troop movements. I never had this kind of experience with Arma (or any other game), and finally I realized that it's just because you can't simulate a war or a battle with 50 or 100 or even 200 peoples in a vast areas like in Arma. It needs thousands of players at least to ignite the reaction of a war simulation.

So I would say that maybe it would be a good idea to consider the direction of going into a massive simulator area, and making the game engine capable of cluster based server systems. I'm not saying that Arma 3 should be an MMO or so, but at least the engine and the server side system should be capable of doing that. Maybe some other company will produce an MMO product with the engine, or the community will do something like that, like with DayZ (even a mod like DayZ could really evolve if such an architecture set up would be possible). My great dream is to play with a massive war simulator, which has the graphical aspects of Arma but the massiveness of Planetside or even exceed that. The only other game concept like that is WW Online, which has a base engine from the previous century. I'm sure the company who will manage to produce such a game, will win over the industry. And also don't forget that maybe the VBS division could benefit from such an architecture too.

Edited June 15, 2012 by Petko

[destroystheovik 10]

A 1000 player server is possible. Plausibly...

"Although Man vs Machine is based on the Unity Engine, any modern game engine could easily be retrofitted with the technology to create something similar in a few months time."

"By using the software, game developers can supposedly build any kind of high-player density MMO game that can handle up to 1000 players on one specific map across eight cell servers. It also supports eleven actions per second (10 movements plus 1 fire), a total bandwidth downstream per player of 420 kbit/s and more."

"This game shows a new dawn to completely new types of online games where massive amount of players, advanced AI and complex interactions with physics can be achieved with great ease. As a gamer, I just can’t wait to experience the feeling of rushing towards the horde of enemies and anticipating the thrill and insuring chaos of battle."

-Comments made by MuchDifferent on their new game "Man vs Machine" which supports up to 1000 players on the same map.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/MuchDifferent-Tanks-Robots-FPS-Guinness,14514.html

[call_911 10]

Even to see a 200-300 man server. just for example the early days of JO where the pub server were 150-200 live players..intense stuff to say the least. just to see that many in a ArmA server to me would have desired effects. God help the Admin of that server though 8)-

[mrcash2009 0]

I finally realized, especially after seeing the success of DayZ, that Arma as a product was never good as a game, but only as an engine and a framework. For a game to work, you need a worked-out entertaining game concept that has a flow and stimulates the players.

I read this bit and didn't bother with the rest, sorry, but ... well ..

BI ... make DayZ a separate game release sooner rather than later.

[jerryhopper 286]

I read this bit and didn't bother with the rest, sorry, but ... well ..

BI ... make DayZ a separate game release sooner rather than later.

i dont get it. all what's needed is a well documented API, that allows us to write scripts that can interact with outside world.

After all, i coded a 'rankingsystem' for BF2 with 2 other enthousisasts, which is sort of the same as with dayz.

.... Creativity does the rest.

Code a Tournament system for the competetive players

Code a Zombie RPG for the zombie-fan's

Code a teletubbie playground for the kiddo's

Code!

[Petko 10]

I read this bit and didn't bother with the rest, sorry, but ... well ..

BI ... make DayZ a separate game release sooner rather than later.

I'm sorry too, but as you didn't read it through, you just replied completly off-topic. This has nothing to do with DayZ.

[Timnos 1]

As a gamer, I just can’t wait to experience the feeling of rushing towards the horde of enemies and anticipating the thrill and insuring chaos of battle."

Do you know what would happen to a 'horde' on the modern battlefield? It would be swiftly obliterated by indirect fire.

[LeeManatee 4]

hmm. yeah. exremely neat idea. i played at arma server with 200 people ( Tushino Serious Games ) and thats fun. too bad such events happens only on wekends.

will be nice to have a cti c&h static server with shitton of people, like 200-500. massive.

[hoak 0]

While certainly compelling food for the future, this is not presently particularly practical for serious realism; to wit:

It also supports eleven actions per second (10 movements plus 1 fire), a total bandwidth downstream per player of 420 kbit/s and more.

While this may be adequate for some some sort of role playing casino magic shooter game with crude hit-scan power puff pixie sparkle weapons; it's far and away not even a fraction of what's required for a high granularity and precision realism shooter...

Even with hit-scan code emulating the mean 600 r/m weapon, it's not difficult to see that the time slice intersection will require something more than 11 a/s resolution -- add leaning, pron, and/or any kind of fast displacement cover mechanics and the cost goes up...

And speaking of cost; the up-stream cost of the server architecture to support even this marginal specification is certain to rival or even surpass what's required for may RPGs...

For now, for the kind of scale realism, detail, and resolution most ArmA Fans covet; for practical and affordable gaming -- BI is still way ahead of the competition in terms of what can be offered in PvE density. The best approach will remain that pioneered in the early R6 games with back-up AI, unless or until sever and bandwidth costs come down substantially.

Just Say'n...

:oops:

Edited June 16, 2012 by Hoak

[mrcash2009 0]

I'm sorry too, but as you didn't read it through, you just replied completely off-topic. This has nothing to do with DayZ.

Dont mention it then :)

Sorry, I had a "Arma=DayZ" react torrets moment.

But I don't really like zombies, I would like to get back to the military simulator concept, and the question of why did it not work (for me).

This is where I should have read from onwards :)