Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Giorgos78

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    16

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Giorgos78

  1. Posted

    QUOTE=W0lle,Mar. 12 2009,17:44]

    Reporting a post to a moderator:

    ================================

    Link to Post: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....1333376

    Topic Title: 256 players on ARMA 2 in DEDICATED SERVERS

    Forum: ArmA 2 - SUGGESTIONS

    Reported by: Giorgos78

    Email address of sender: giorgos.360@hotmail.com

    Reported on: Mar. 12 2009,13:49

    Message:

    the moderator is un fair he could just lock the posts not the poll

    dont you think?

    he goyt t personal with the thred

    unlock it please thanks

    And you think we moderators act against each other because of your oh-so-important poll? It should have been closed immediately because it's useless.

    Please refrain from further complaints regarding this thread. It remains closed.

    Regards

    W0lle

    Group: Members

    Posts: 182

    Joined: Oct. 2008 Posted: Mar. 12 2009,04:33

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

    If you don't like his thread just don't post anything and leave him alone. As long as he's following the rules then he's fine. Take it to the pm's if you absolutely cant restrain yourself. And as for arma 256, arma2 doesn't promise anything like that. So stop assuming it will be the same...

    this is the last post before you lock this thread moran

    what you say is a personal opinion

    but 812 gamers were interested in this tread

    stop beang an ashole an bring the poll back pepolre are interested in masive action games as arma 2 should be

    this guys locked the thread with a cheap excuse

    at least they could leave the poll so every body could only vote without making any comments

    BUT

    they cant stand the heat from MAG uh?

    chep excuses tc tc tc

    yor conclousions

  2. Posted

    dear poster ...

    1. longer answer :

    others tried to explain to you that with ArmA 128+ players is possible as long:

    A. the server CPU single core performance is available

    B. rest of server hardware is top quality (NIC, RAM, OS etc)

    C. the server line and surrounding nodes are highest tier

    D. clients joining with enough powerful computers and lines to enjoy it

    now ... about ArmA 2 we already know it's :

    A. optimized more than ArmA

    B. supporting multi-core/multi-cpu

    and from OFP/ArmA serie we know there was no 'top' number limit (what hardware can handle you get)

    thus the 128 to 256 players scenario is already NOT in impossible land or like sony claims PS3 only smile_o.gif

    2. shorter answer :

    yes , as long it's worth it

    p.s. there is no point cause drama nor attack other posters or post in advertising style for PS3 MAG / ZIPPER INTERACTIVE or Sony ...

    friend listen

    stop talking and vote...... if you like

    If you dont like to vote its ok with me BUT dont talk technical issues in this thread

    i think i made it crystal clear that 256 players is an option for some other games

    i was very acurate with names and numbers

    256 players is a fact

    DO YOU WANT IT ON ARMA 2 FOR PC -360- PS3 huh.gif?

    just vote

    no need of talking

    statistics will give the answear

    simple math...

  3. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]Alright, we'll have to trust Zipper Interactive's experience with online gaming, then.

    Why Zipper Interactive - are you gettin paid for such "poll advertisements"?

    Quote[/b] ]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.

    Amazing you can really see and judge from a screenshot how good mp gaming in Arma2 will be? Throw away all crystal balls - ask Giorgos78!!

    Quote[/b] ]It's gonna be a bloodbath.

    Your knowledge about the games developed by BIS is zero or nada?

    Btw isnt Zipper Interactive a commercial company?

    Quote[/b] ]§4) Advertising commercial products

    Do not advertise any commercial products other than those of BIS/BIA on the forums without prior BIS/BIA approval.

    mty friend i read this on the internet

    this is not my words

    YES ZIPPER INTERACTIVE came to greece and the hole stuff

    made a **** job to me and now i owe them.

    mercy my friend!!!!!

    the only reazon i mention MAG is because ZIPPER made to the consoles sometthing that no body have done until now...

    256 players online

    this is my proof of what can be done in ARMA 2 also

    im repeating the same thing becaouse the gamers keep talking about technical stuff of the servers

    this threafd is for the number of players.

    some people forget that

  5. Posted

    You still don't get it, do you?

    You question is weird, as everyone WOULD be saying YES. Even the ones saying Quality over Quantity wouldn't mind the option being there since arma is all about user created missions, where you can target a certain number of players.

    Also:

    It is not only about the server performance, data transfer, but also about the network optimizations, CPU usage etc.

    Plus:

    1. Arma is in theory infinite in the number of players you could set up.

    2. Most servers out there are either public ones payed by big providers, or any type of group related to ArmA in any way: teams, clans, tournaments etc. So there is not only 1 "official" server out the game style doesn't fit it.

    3. ArmA2 will be (hopefully) a better optimized Arma1. By that i don't expect a huge number of changes even in how the network traffic is handled etc.

    4. ArmA 1 max number of player have been 123. The server was stable, not laggy for about 3h, but right on its verge. Will Arma2 be more stable: i hope so. Would it handle 150 players? i hope so. will it handle twice as more as Arma1? there is no way....

    So, then, since for ArmA2 is impossible *because for ArmA1 is, even if the server could easily take a lot more beating, but it is the game that crashes, and not the server*, why then this question? (i am not saying that from a game developed from the start with this goal in mind wouldn't be possible, but that would not be arma)

    You still don't get it, do you?

    This is not a technical discasion tread

    it writen in the title

    DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?huh.gif

    YES OR NO

    what is that you dont understand?

    just vote with honesty

    thanks

    It's already in ArmA. But it doesn't work because home internet connections are way too slow and the computer hardware to run all of this hasn't been invented yet.

    This is not a technical discasion tread

    it writen in the title

    DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?

    YES OR NO

    what is that you dont understand?

    just vote with honesty

    thanks

  6. Posted

    You still don't get it, do you?

    You question is weird, as everyone WOULD be saying YES. Even the ones saying Quality over Quantity wouldn't mind the option being there since arma is all about user created missions, where you can target a certain number of players.

    Also:

    It is not only about the server performance, data transfer, but also about the network optimizations, CPU usage etc.

    Plus:

    1. Arma is in theory infinite in the number of players you could set up.

    2. Most servers out there are either public ones payed by big providers, or any type of group related to ArmA in any way: teams, clans, tournaments etc. So there is not only 1 "official" server out the game style doesn't fit it.

    3. ArmA2 will be (hopefully) a better optimized Arma1. By that i don't expect a huge number of changes even in how the network traffic is handled etc.

    4. ArmA 1 max number of player have been 123. The server was stable, not laggy for about 3h, but right on its verge. Will Arma2 be more stable: i hope so. Would it handle 150 players? i hope so. will it handle twice as more as Arma1? there is no way....

    So, then, since for ArmA2 is impossible *because for ArmA1 is, even if the server could easily take a lot more beating, but it is the game that crashes, and not the server*, why then this question? (i am not saying that from a game developed from the start with this goal in mind wouldn't be possible, but that would not be arma)

    You still don't get it, do you?

    This is not a technical discasion tread

    it writen in the title

    DO YOU WANT 256 PLAYERS?huh.gif

    YES OR NO

    what is that you dont understand?

    just vote with honesty

    thanks

  7. Posted

    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

  8. Posted

    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?huh.gif

    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 wink_o.gif )

    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

  9. Posted

    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

  13. Posted

    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?huh.gif

    please vote with honesty

    thanks

  14. Posted

    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...

  15. Posted

    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]

×