256 players on ARMA 2 in DEDICATED SERVERS

[Giorgos78 0]

this is MAG (massive action game) with 256 players on PS3

in DEDICATED SERVERS coming this DECEMBER

whould you like ARMA2 to be played with 256 players on pc xbox360 and ps3

[InqWiper 0]

Im really unimpressed.

Funny how that video is named HQ version when its shit quality. Im pretty sure none of that video was ingame. How are you going to solve the bandwidth issue? Even if you can have 256 players on a server its useless if it starts lagging. How can you have a server with that many players for the type of game shown in the video or the type of game ArmA2 will be?

I dont know how many people can be on a server at the same time already in ArmA but I think its beyond any practical limit. Ive played ArmA with about 100 players pretty long ago and it was really laggy .Wasnt long ago since I saw an ArmA server with 70+ players on it and I find it hard to belive it was laggfree unless people were really spread out and not doing much.

I dont think its going to make much difference if we can have 100 or 1000 players on a server in ArmA2. I think player bandwidth will be the chokepoint.

I didnt vote because I dont care either way. Sure it would be cool to play on a server with 256 players but it would be impossible in any normal type of mission with normal connections.

[Electricleash 133]

Absolutely no point, It's so rare to find enough players to make a game you could actually CALL multiplayer, let alone one of the Massive games your suggesting... there are now so many multiplayer IP's out there now (and more on the way no doubt) that the base of players is stretching far too thin.

I'd rather play with a few solid team mates who you can actually communicate with, than force my way through a mass of knuckle dragging, infantile, wasters!

edit:

Apologies if that came out a bit harsh... just noticed it's your first post... I just finished work in time to go to check emails, bed and get up for more work.

gah!

[Giorgos78 0]

Im really unimpressed.

Funny how that video is named HQ version when its shit quality. Im pretty sure none of that video was ingame. How are you going to solve the bandwidth issue? Even if you can have 256 players on a server its useless if it starts lagging. How can you have a server with that many players for the type of game shown in the video or the type of game ArmA2 will be?

I dont know how many people can be on a server at the same time already in ArmA but I think its beyond any practical limit. Ive played ArmA with about 100 players pretty long ago and it was really laggy .Wasnt long ago since I saw an ArmA server with 70+ players on it and I find it hard to belive it was laggfree unless people were really spread out and not doing much.

I dont think its going to make much difference if we can have 100 or 1000 players on a server in ArmA2. I think player bandwidth will be the chokepoint.

I didnt vote because I dont care either way. Sure it would be cool to play on a server with 256 players but it would be impossible in any normal type of mission with normal connections.

ZIPPER INTERACTIVE is building  up a new server set up

which will alow 256 to play lag free based on new tachnology

reaD more here

[link removed]

[Spetz 0]

BIS should better optimize the existing code to handle collisions and damage. (people getting run over by cars driving by them, people getting stuck in spots) The worst one is the one where you shoot someone, and apparently he shot you first and you die, or you shoot them they keep on running

[Giorgos78 0]

BIS should better optimize the existing code to handle collisions and damage. (people getting run over by cars driving by them, people getting stuck in spots) The worst one is the one where you shoot someone, and apparently he shot you first and you die, or you shoot them they keep on running

lets say that the servers are going to work perfectly

Do you want to play in a biger scale or not???

there are ways to make it hapen.

This is one...

[link removed]

consetrate on arma2 and the 256 players

let the developers and programers think how to make it happen

DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?

YES OR NO?

this is the question.

posts like "this cant work" " its impossible..." etc are for some other treads

or from people who see this with a negative eye

ZIPPER INTERACTIVE did it

if we want IB will do it to...

[InqWiper 0]

Im really unimpressed.

Funny how that video is named HQ version when its shit quality. Im pretty sure none of that video was ingame. How are you going to solve the bandwidth issue? Even if you can have 256 players on a server its useless if it starts lagging. How can you have a server with that many players for the type of game shown in the video or the type of game ArmA2 will be?

I dont know how many people can be on a server at the same time already in ArmA but I think its beyond any practical limit. Ive played ArmA with about 100 players pretty long ago and it was really laggy .Wasnt long ago since I saw an ArmA server with 70+ players on it and I find it hard to belive it was laggfree unless people were really spread out and not doing much.

I dont think its going to make much difference if we can have 100 or 1000 players on a server in ArmA2. I think player bandwidth will be the chokepoint.

I didnt vote because I dont care either way. Sure it would be cool to play on a server with 256 players but it would be impossible in any normal type of mission with normal connections.

ZIPPER INTERACTIVE is building  up a new server set up

which will alow 256 to play lag free based on new tachnology

reaD more here

http://www.ps3center.net/news....t-month

Was there any more to read than this?:

Quote[/b] ]First details of PS3 exclusive MAG to hit next month

Posted on February 25, 2009  by Nick

MAG, or Massive Action Game, was first announced last year at E3 by a pre-rendered teaser trailer.  The game, due sometime within the 2009 fiscal year, will employ a new server set up that will allow for up to 256 players to engage in epic battles across large landscapes.  Outside of that, though, Zipper Interactive has been silent about the title.

...

MAG is a massively multiplayer online shooter, developed by Zipper Interactive(creators of the original SOCOM games).  The titles is due out in the 2009 fiscal year, exclusively on the PS3

You can get me to belive that the server will be able to handle 256 players but it will be harder to convince me that the players will be able to handle 256 players in large combats.

[derk yall 0]

...ZIPPER INTERACTIVE did it...

They did? So is the game already sold? If not its still a promise, which can or cant be acomplished. But for me it sound only like a hype for atracting costumers

[Giorgos78 0]

Im really unimpressed.

Funny how that video is named HQ version when its shit quality. Im pretty sure none of that video was ingame. How are you going to solve the bandwidth issue? Even if you can have 256 players on a server its useless if it starts lagging. How can you have a server with that many players for the type of game shown in the video or the type of game ArmA2 will be?

I dont know how many people can be on a server at the same time already in ArmA but I think its beyond any practical limit. Ive played ArmA with about 100 players pretty long ago and it was really laggy .Wasnt long ago since I saw an ArmA server with 70+ players on it and I find it hard to belive it was laggfree unless people were really spread out and not doing much.

I dont think its going to make much difference if we can have 100 or 1000 players on a server in ArmA2. I think player bandwidth will be the chokepoint.

I didnt vote because I dont care either way. Sure it would be cool to play on a server with 256 players but it would be impossible in any normal type of mission with normal connections.

ZIPPER INTERACTIVE is building  up a new server set up

which will alow 256 to play lag free based on new tachnology

reaD more here

http://www.ps3center.net/news....t-month

Was there any more to read than this?:

Quote[/b] ]First details of PS3 exclusive MAG to hit next month

Posted on February 25, 2009  by Nick

MAG, or Massive Action Game, was first announced last year at E3 by a pre-rendered teaser trailer.  The game, due sometime within the 2009 fiscal year, will employ a new server set up that will allow for up to 256 players to engage in epic battles across large landscapes.  Outside of that, though, Zipper Interactive has been silent about the title.

...

MAG is a massively multiplayer online shooter, developed by Zipper Interactive(creators of the original SOCOM games).  The titles is due out in the 2009 fiscal year, exclusively on the PS3

You can get me to belive that the server will be able to handle 256 players but it will be harder to convince me that the players will be able to handle 256 players in large combats.

there are ways to play and communicate perfectly

like in battlefield 2 (pc)

do you know the COMMO ROSE comunication system?

I think not. It is very eazy to cordinate attacks and defences

DONT MIX PLAYER ATTITUDE (imature players. 8 years old etc) and BIG NUMBER OF PLAYERS

if a player doesnt falow orders in a teamplay game, the game is going to ne destroed.

Imagine playing search and destroy on COD4 with only 6 player squad and a kid start shooting like crazy and not covering the other team mebers

ITS NOT ABOUT HOW MANY, ITS ABOUT HOW THE GAMERS WILL PLAY THE GAME

dont get comfused with the numbers

game developers know what to do for the game to be fun

The think is do you whant 256 players in a perfect game play

lag free?

please vote with honesty

thanks

[Giorgos78 0]

dont forget we are talking about a fps game

please vote

your opinion counts to the programers and the developers of this game

[InqWiper 0]

Im really unimpressed.

Funny how that video is named HQ version when its shit quality. Im pretty sure none of that video was ingame. How are you going to solve the bandwidth issue? Even if you can have 256 players on a server its useless if it starts lagging. How can you have a server with that many players for the type of game shown in the video or the type of game ArmA2 will be?

I dont know how many people can be on a server at the same time already in ArmA but I think its beyond any practical limit. Ive played ArmA with about 100 players pretty long ago and it was really laggy .Wasnt long ago since I saw an ArmA server with 70+ players on it and I find it hard to belive it was laggfree unless people were really spread out and not doing much.

I dont think its going to make much difference if we can have 100 or 1000 players on a server in ArmA2. I think player bandwidth will be the chokepoint.

I didnt vote because I dont care either way. Sure it would be cool to play on a server with 256 players but it would be impossible in any normal type of mission with normal connections.

ZIPPER INTERACTIVE is building  up a new server set up

which will alow 256 to play lag free based on new tachnology

reaD more here

http://www.ps3center.net/news....t-month

Was there any more to read than this?:

Quote[/b] ]First details of PS3 exclusive MAG to hit next month

Posted on February 25, 2009  by Nick

MAG, or Massive Action Game, was first announced last year at E3 by a pre-rendered teaser trailer.  The game, due sometime within the 2009 fiscal year, will employ a new server set up that will allow for up to 256 players to engage in epic battles across large landscapes.  Outside of that, though, Zipper Interactive has been silent about the title.

...

MAG is a massively multiplayer online shooter, developed by Zipper Interactive(creators of the original SOCOM games).  The titles is due out in the 2009 fiscal year, exclusively on the PS3

You can get me to belive that the server will be able to handle 256 players but it will be harder to convince me that the players will be able to handle 256 players in large combats.

there are ways to play and communicate perfectly

like in battlefield 2 (pc)

do you know the COMMO  ROSE comunication system?

I think not. It is very eazy to cordinate attacks and defences

DONT MIX PLAYER ATTITUDE (imature players. 8  years old etc) and BIG NUMBER OF PLAYERS

if a player doesnt falow orders in a teamplay game, the game is going to ne destroed.

Imagine playing search and destroy on COD4 with only 6 player squad and a kid start shooting like crazy and not covering the other team mebers

ITS NOT ABOUT HOW MANY, ITS ABOUT HOW THE GAMERS WILL PLAY THE GAME

dont get comfused with the numbers

game developers know what to do for the game to be fun

The think is do you whant 256 players in a perfect game play

lag free?

please vote with honesty

thanks

I have not said anything about player attitudes being the problem. What I am saying is that players will not have an internet connection of a capacity sufficient for handling the required information transfer. What I am claiming is that you can not under normal circumstances get 256 players to play this type of game on the same server over the internet without lagg. I dont care if you are running the game on a server that you brought back 50 years in time. If the clients internet connections can not handle the amount of information that needs to be transfered there will be lagg. If you still dont understand what I am saying I really dont know what to say.

-Edit

To be more clear I would like to remind you that I said I do not belive it is possible to have 256 players engaged in large combats. Ofcourse if you have 256 players on the server where the players themselves are engaged in 8vs8 battles far away from eachother it is very possible.

[Giorgos78 0]

lets say this problem will be solved in a week from now.

dont ask me how but lets say it not an issue any more...

DO YOU WANT TO PLAY WITH 256 PLAYERS, ON LAG FREE DEDICATED SERVERS AND PERFECT TEAMPLAY???

YES OR NO?

please vote with honesty

thanks

[InqWiper 0]

lets say this problem will be solved in a week from now.

dont ask me how but lets say it not an issue any more...

DO YOU WANT TO PLAY WITH 256 PLAYERS, ON LAG FREE DEDICATED SERVERS AND PERFECT TEAMPLAY???

YES OR NO?

please vote with honesty

thanks

Sure I would.

Would you like to live the rest of your life as superman? Dont ask me how, just assume its possible. Would you like to be able to fly and move faster than a speeding bullet? Yes or no?  

Im still not voting for or against this ability in ArmA2.  

[Sniperwolf572 758]

Can't you set unlimited playable slots in your OFP/ArmA1 mission anyways?

If issues like performance, bandwidth and stability magically wouldn't be an issue, then it is already possible, even in OFP/ArmA1.

[Giorgos78 0]

Im still not voting for or against this ability in ArmA2.  

ha ha ha ha!!!

ok then lets just consetrait on what we want.

This is what this poll is all about.

Let the technical isssues to the experts of BI.

the number of the multiplayer is what we are talking about

please vote with honesty

your vote counts to the people of BI

[Giorgos78 0]

Can't you set unlimited playable slots in your OFP/ArmA1 mission anyways?

If issues like performance, bandwidth and stability magically wouldn't be an issue, then it is already possible, even in OFP/ArmA1.

dont talk about technical issues in this tread

The thread is about the number of players

this is a game developer and programers issue

dont destroy the tread as a moderator you are

its a simple poll

just expres your needs by voteing what is wright for you

this is the meaning of a poll

[Sniperwolf572 758]

That's what I said. Ignoring all technical issues, it's already possible:

265 Player Slot Mission

And the number doesn't stop at 265, and as long as you ignore technical issues, with OFP/ArmA, you can go into infinity.

If my need is to be able to have a 256+ player mission, then it's already been granted....8 years ago.

[andersson 285]

This poll is strange, who doesnt want the possibility for many players? And do you think BIS will incorporate that just because of a poll, I guess the limited factor is what they can do not what they know we want.

And btw, IC:arma have had 100+ games and that there are no upper limit since OFP

[NoRailgunner 0]

Damn, I thought mp is more about how good missions are designed and how great are people playing together such missions.

But now its revealed - mp gaming is only about the number of players....only for gorgeous statistics.

[Electricleash 133]

Exactly! Quality over quantity any day.

[dm 9]

this is MAG (massive action game) with 256 players on PS3

... ...

whould you like ARMA2 to be played with 256 players???

consetrate on arma2 and the 256 players

let the developers and programers think how to make it happen

DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?

The think is do you whant 256 players in a perfect game play

lag free?

please vote with honesty

thanks

dont forget we are talking about a fps game

please vote

your opinion counts to the programers and the developers of this game

Its already possible, as sniperwolf said, the game can handle it, the internet can not. Theres only so much data you can compress and ignore before the fps becomes turn based. This is why MMO's work, because there is much less real-time data to send - attacks based on dice rolls rather than the players ability to aim inherently requires less data to transfer.

Asking "would you like to be able to play with 256 players lag free" is like asking "would you like this free $100,000" Ofcourse everyone is going to say yes.

Given the constraints of the existing internet infrastructure, in some cases its almost impossible to play with 16 players lag free. Thats not the games fault, but the fact that internet infrastructure is over-stretched. Too many people using too few "pipes". Until thats sorted, "lag free" isnt going to exist.

[sarcasm]And I'm sure the devs are writing sloppy network code because only 20 people want to play together at a time...[/sarcasm]

Honestly, do you really think the devs arent trying to enhance the net code already? Do you think a poll with maybe 100 answers is going to make them suddenly think "we have to re-write our network code to accommodate more players" ? I think not somehow, especially when the net code already supports many hundreds, if not thousands, of players. If anything, you should be polling the ISP's for more useable bandwidth...

(Thats my honest answer btw )

[Colossus 2]

I was there the day they tried to set a player record in OFP, it wasn't very playable though. So, yeah, quality infront of quantity

[rundll.exe 12]

As already said, ArmA is unique that it supports unlimited players, but the server CPU cant handle it.

I now put my bets on the multi core support, this would make a HUGE step in server performance, since most dedicated servers have multi cores anyway.

[Giorgos78 0]

this is MAG (massive action game) with 256 players on PS3

... ...

whould you like ARMA2 to be played with 256 players???

consetrate on arma2 and the 256 players

let the developers and programers think how to make it happen

DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?

The think is do you whant 256 players in a perfect game play

lag free?

please vote with honesty

thanks

dont forget we are talking about a fps game

please vote

your opinion counts to the programers and the developers of this game

Its already possible, as sniperwolf said, the game can handle it, the internet can not. Theres only so much data you can compress and ignore before the fps becomes turn based. This is why MMO's work, because there is much less real-time data to send - attacks based on dice rolls rather than the players ability to aim inherently requires less data to transfer.

Asking "would you like to be able to play with 256 players lag free" is like asking "would you like this free $100,000" Ofcourse everyone is going to say yes.

Given the constraints of the existing internet infrastructure, in some cases its almost impossible to play with 16 players lag free. Thats not the games fault, but the fact that internet infrastructure is over-stretched. Too many people using too few "pipes". Until thats sorted, "lag free" isnt going to exist.

[sarcasm]And I'm sure the devs are writing sloppy network code because only 20 people want to play together at a time...[/sarcasm]

Honestly, do you really think the devs arent trying to enhance the net code already? Do you think a poll with maybe 100 answers is going to make them suddenly think "we have to re-write our network code to accommodate more players" ? I think not somehow, especially when the net code already supports many hundreds, if not thousands, of players. If anything, you should be polling the ISP's for more useable bandwidth...

(Thats my honest answer btw )

my friend i already explained that this problem is solved.

there is new technology coming for setting up the servres

new ways  

like pay-to-play (256 players is luxury in now days)

http://www.gamespot.com/news....s3.html

also read cerfuly

A lot of people certainly perked up in their seats when Sony announced their new "Massive Action Game" for the PS3, MAG, at their recently-concluded E3 2008 keynote.

For those of you who missed this bit of news, MAG, as it is aptly called, promises to bring the meaning of HUGE to an entirely new level. That's because the said game will have a whopping 256 players divided into teams of eight to fight free-for-all in one humongous map.

There have been some concerns raised, though, given such a large quantity of players having a go at each other all in one time. Many of them revolve around lags and exactly just how soon can you enjoy the game when you need to look for 255 people more to play with or against you.

In response, Sony has reassured fans via its blog that although it is massive, it is an action shooter at its core.

You can run around and shoot enemies, throw grenades, and drive vehicles just like any other shooter except with MAG you'll do it with up to 255 players.

{{{{{{{The team at Zipper was one of the pioneers of online gaming on consoles with SOCOM franchise and they've used this knowledge to create a brand new server architecture to make an original game like MAG possible.}}}}}}}}}}}

Alright, we'll have to trust Zipper Interactive's experience with online gaming, then. I mean, SOCOM really is street cred right there. Anyway, the team cannot as of yet reveal more details and information pertaining to the game. But they do have an in-game screenshot for us to look at in the meantime. This is the first of them all, and we say it does leave a good impression.

It's gonna be a bloodbath.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Article:

E3 2008: Zipper Interactive's MAG promises 256-player online war

[Giorgos78 0]

As already said, ArmA is unique that it supports unlimited players, but the server CPU cant handle it.

I now put my bets on the multi core support, this would make a HUGE step in server performance, since most dedicated servers have multi cores anyway.

let the technical stuff to the experts my friend

have a read on this

you are a gamer

your goal is to play

consertrait on what you like to play

you just vote what you like for ARMA2

simple as that