Jip with new netcode

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Well... Actually i was told to start a new thread...

... So suma, u gonna implement it with the new netcode that comes with ressistence?

[Mister Frag 0]

The problem isn't really with the netcode itself, but the underlying engine as a whole and the assumptions that were made about how games are structured. The netcode just handles the data transport.

[suma 8]

Join in progress will not be a part of Resistance upgrade. We are evaluating several possibile ways how to implement it in our future products, though.

[ALDEGA 0]

Espectro, in your subtitle you say "by popular demand"?

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Suma @ April 04 2002,19:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Join in progress will not be a part of Resistance upgrade. We are evaluating several possibile ways how to implement it in our future products, though.<span id='postcolor'>

Ok... just needed to clarify it.

Aldega:

Yes.. it was popular demand that I should create a new topic and i could simply not get that line of answer in the original thread.

Im not disapointed or nothing, since i mostly play in clan wars only anyway.

Was just hoping to see 1 large dynamic world. (maybe you could make all trees and buildings indestructable.. + make weapons disapeer after a couple of minutes.....who knows.

[Lt_Damage 0]

God no.. I would rather wait half an hour for a game, than play in some crap quake version of OFP.

guns / bodies / broken stuff disappearing? Get real.. no way.. Might aswell just loose all the things that make OFP unique also, vehicles, large maps...

If JIP cannot be implemented without removing these things, than forget it, let the n00bs complain about the wait for games...

[BigQEd 0]

Well you have to consider the following:

There will be server slot limitations. With new Netcode coming soon it will optimize servers and allow more slots. So I would say it is feasible that JIP could be implemented without making things disappear.

There has to be a happy middle ground. No most people do not like the way most FPS's make bodies fade as it takes from realism. However, most people do not like having to wait in line to play a game on their favorite server or coming on the server and just missing the Mission start... (that is probably the most hated thing about OFP)

I think that with improved Netcode... BIS will be able to implement JIP in some fashion without sacrificing realism and playablity.

I know that we at FragHaus would love to see both improved Netcode (first) and JIP (in some fashion when BIS is ready).

Heck I would LOVE to have servers online with the ability to have 100 Players battling with intense missions... with more than just guns. Imagine... almost like full scale battles.

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

What sort of improvements can we expect then with a new netcode? I know that there will be an in-game browser system, so i am happy. I hate GaySpy, and (i think) you cannot have the EYE for free (for a trial periode maybe). So they suck.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Well... u dont really HAVE to register for using it

Anyway,JIP could be really good on a conquest like map... Where you are fighting on an entire island.

[Gorgi Knootewoot 0]

I don't think we can expect JIP in OFP at all. Although it would be the best thing that could happen right now

[ralphwiggum 6]

ok..AFAIK the reason why JIP is difficult to implelment in OFP is becuase of large chunks of data that needs to be transfered.

for example, let's say we are playing armored division map. nonetheless, we would see loads of trees getting squashed. each tree would represent a data that needs to be sent.

if someone joins in the middle of game, then the amount of data will increase accordingly as time goes on. which means burden on servers and clients. not just trees, think of all the blast marks too.

one way i see to reduce server-side burden of sending these damage info would be distributed info sending system. each client who is already in the game would be liable for sending certain part of island's status. this way, at least for those who give out infos on state of island, it won't be that much of burden. let's say we end up with about 1,000 info to send.

then assuming there are 25 ppl already playing(with NEW netcode!, each player would send that new person, the 26th player, info from each computer. so for incumbent players, they would send on average of 40 infos to 26th person.(better than one server with 1,000)

the draw back would be the 26th person. he/she will end up with 1,000 infos to recieve. So he has to wait just a while.

[ALDEGA 0]

I don't like the idea of JIP because IMO it just doesn't fit in a game like OF.

In coop games JIP is absolutely unacceptable. I even have concerns about CTF maps. I only see it being useful for DM maps. Than again, OF is not a DM game, Quake and UT are.

btw, Why do some of you think that the new netcode will make games with 100 or more players feasible? I think the new netcode will be about making 8-20 player games as smooth as possible. The highest amount of players in a normal multiplayer game is currently 32, which tends to lag alot when there's somebody with a highping connection. Trust me, 8-20 is more than you'll ever need.

[ralphwiggum 6]

good point....improving current state with current number of players is our wish.

[BigQEd 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ALDEGA @ April 05 2002,04:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The highest amount of players in a normal multiplayer game is currently 32, which tends to lag alot when there's somebody with a highping connection. Trust me, 8-20 is more than you'll ever need. <span id='postcolor'>

Sorry but several newer games such as MOHAA, RTCW and Tribes II are capable of 50-64 players. This trend is increasing as computers become faster and gaming becomes more in-depth.

Trust me, we already run 28-32 on our OFP servers and we want more. Heck you are speaking about limiting games to 20 players when you have MMORPG's out there that host hundreds and even thousands at a time. That's the trend... Mega-Multiplayer is the future for all games.

Full Scale... All Out War

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I agree with bigqed... But as u said... its not acceptable in co-op games... and i dont think it should be in ctf nor dm either.. its awesoe as it is.. but in games like conquest etc.. it would be cool.

They could also make it so that its only every 5 minutes units can join (By being paradropped or shipped in) to a mission.

[ALDEGA 0]

I've never seen a Mohaa type of server run fluently with 64 players.

And those massive online rpg games are totally different to games like OF. They require alot less bandwith (it's just point and click) and they run on master servers, which were made for thousands of players. (and they normally require the player to pay a monthly fee).

[Vegabond 0]

Yes i would love to see platoon size movements in MP.. like a entire 40 man clan engage in battle with the other..

Big clan wars I hope soon if we goto a big network enviroment..

[Mister Frag 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Gorgi Knootewoot @ April 05 2002,15:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What sort of improvements can we expect then with a new netcode? I know that there will be an in-game browser system, so i am happy. I hate GaySpy, and (i think) you cannot have the EYE for free (for a trial periode maybe). So they suck.<span id='postcolor'>

There is now an ASE SDK, which allows developers to incorporate the ASE client code into a game.

If BIS were to go this route and license the SDK, the user wouldn't have to pay, and get the best in-game browser imaginable.

[BigQEd 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ALDEGA @ April 05 2002,06:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've never seen a Mohaa type of server run fluently with 64 players.  

And those massive online rpg games are totally different to games like OF. They require alot less bandwith (it's just point and click) and they run on master servers, which were made for thousands of players. (and they normally require the player to pay a monthly fee).<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think you grasp my point.

The point is games that only allow 20 players have died out. It just is not appealing to the masses as it once was. And for good reason.

Also I am sure if the game permits and works with a large crowd like 100 players it will run like a DREAM with only 20. So think about what is best for OFP and it's future.

Larger servers with more involved is going to make this game last a lot longer.

MMORPG's are not so far removed from FPS's these days... and if you think they are then you haven't played some of the lastest. Also understand I am not saying make this into a remote server system that BIS runs that requires people to pay monthly (which is why those MMORPG's charge a monthly fee).

Oh and I have seen RTCW and MOHAA run ok with 64 players... you just have to have a beast of a system with lot's of bandwidth at the server.

[Placebo 29]

How much data do Q3 clone games have to transmit compared to Opf?

[Chris Death 0]

OK - only one question,

how many admins do you think, should be present,

to keep an 60+ player game (ofp) on a regular level.

I'm only asking that, because i've seen so many threads

about kiddy players on dedie's and (base-raping, respawn-killing, bad word, etc.)

You want to have a 40 men platoon? Who takes control

over this force (would it be possible, to control them)?

Well, i also would like to see the possibility for more players

to join.

One problem could also be: usually the map will be transmitted to clients, before the things start changing.

While transmitting the whole map, during objects, units etc..

are changing, it could be more difficult. E.g: a mission with

1mb, it takes about 1 or 2 minutes (not for a 56k con) to

receive this map, if it's the first time played. Now while

loading the actual state of this map, it changes again for

1 or 2 minutes later. This must be transmitted again to the

in-progress joiner.

[ralphwiggum 6]

having a good netcode will be great to acompliash inter-clan warfare.

here's what i imagine.

let's say there are 6 clans each with 8 ppl. then we can have 48 ppl on a dedicated server with little or no lag, and split the clans in two. by this way, each clan can be a squad and run around, while talking to other clans on same side.

and DV, your point is noteworthy. If the joining player has map alreday, then it should be no problem, like all those Q3 based games. they usually have preset maps/missions, so it doesn't matter.

for OFP, thanx to its awesome mission editor, there are thousands of missions that are great. so the amounts of contents/data that should be transfered are seldom identical. so we need to look at this aspect.

[BobtheDead 0]

haha, i find it funny when it was said that "bodies and guns that disappear after a few minutes is unrealistic" or "I don't like the idea of JIP because IMO it just doesn't fit in a game like OF."

Concerns of realism? And respawn is realistic? .... thats what i thought... if they wanted to make it 100% realistic they would of sent rifles with the game so you can shoot yourself the first time you die in the game. Problems with that? no repeat customers...

I come from mechwarrior 4 and Rogue spear... those are great games. Rogue spear has no join in progress but the rounds never last more that 5 min. On mechwarrior i played on a sever all the time that did CTF for and hour per round..... that game does have JIP and that made it very enjoyable, as know one wants to wait that long for the game to start. Its a balance between having fun and realism, the only constraints on either is what the engine can do.

Quake 3 and others like it were geared around the MP aspect of it... so its kinda hard to compare them to ofp, as in quake3 might send less data then flashpoint but quake handles the data better.

Honestly, if the netcode was further optimized beyond what it is now and JIP was implemented. i can see servers boosting capacity and games lasting over 30 min. To me 30 min is not enough time for CTF at all, it takes 20 min to really lay it into the other team.

-BtD

[ALDEGA 0]

OT: In Rogue Spear round take alot longer than 5 minutes, when you're playing terrorist hunt. RS never had (and even Ghost Recon) doesn't have JIP. Yet lots of people are playing it. Draw your conclusions.

[BigQEd 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ALDEGA @ April 07 2002,06:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Draw your conclusions.<span id='postcolor'>

My conclusion is that both those games stink...

Understand what Bob said holds a lot of truth. I agree that with the length on the games in OFP that JIP is needed and I hope BIS implements it. I know they currently have their hands full with the Netcode and other misc bugs... but when all of that is nailed down I hope JIP is one of the next things on their list.