Author Topic: Project Reality Online testing with 128/256/512 players  (Read 32159 times)

Offline Beaufort

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • WIP
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #90 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:37 »
128 player Gazala 16 plox

There you go...

Offline Beaufort

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • WIP
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #91 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:21 »
But yeah if I have to choose between El Alamein 128 and Gazala 16 ... :-X

Offline Vernah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #92 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:31 »
zm0g even with 40 v 40, it'd improve gameplay on some of the larger maps. Some maps just feel like they're missing players :(

Offline Archimonday

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.197
  • Sir vis pacem, para bellum!
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #93 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:57 »
I really like the idea of having 128 People on a server, but after playing today for a good hour on this test server, I find myself still disappointed by BF2's ability to handle such a heavy load on a server.

It all started becoming less of a red letter day for me, when I was watching the server browser. Typically with a German based server, I can expect the server (for me) to display an average server ping of between 180 - 200. However with this server, the average ping was at least 30 ms higher, between 210 - 240 ms, which was an immediate realization that said the server is being heavily stressed, so much so that it is actually effecting the servers ability to relay information.

Upon entering the server, I was initially happy to see that all 128 players were on the map, that vehicles were moving around, and that squads, and VOIP had been for the most part fixed to a working state. However, even with an average ping of 160 (which I would not find surprising on a over seas server) there were moments of intense latency lag, which I know was not caused by my over the top ping on this European server.

I would estimate, that approximately every five, to ten minutes of gameplay saw at least 1, or 2 server slow downs, universally for all players, not just me. To reaffirm the notion that the server was slowing down as a result of the higher player count, I only had to observe for a few minutes. Problems would not really arise until players were confined to a single area. Id say that despite the 4km size of the maps being played, that most, if not all of the server was in an area of 1km or less. It was at moments like these, when firefights started erupting, and large groups of each team would converge on a single flag, or valley, or area, that the server would experience slow down, no doubt caused by the increased number of players.

Although servers try to keep information as basic as possible to allow for today's modern online internet games, when the server has to send out those same packets of information to twice the number of people, it cannot keep up. Certainly a faster dedicated box would be able to handle the strain better, but I don't think that a powerful dedicated box could still keep up with the traffic demands on the game.


All in all I love the idea, and would like to see how it pans out in the future. But as of the moment, im not truly impressed by its performance.

Offline Neighbor Kid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #94 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:19 »
pretty sure you all are smart enough to say.. well if you play a 16 size map.. its not going to go over very well.. so you play a 64 player or 128 player maps..  id be happy with 100
« Last Edit: 26-01-2011, 23:01:30 by Neighbor Kid »
http://i52.tinypic.com/245iq1l.jpg
My Day Begins When Your Days End

Offline Archimonday

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.197
  • Sir vis pacem, para bellum!
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #95 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:06 »
80 - 100 would be a good test to do, I feel 80 players especially would be far more stable.

Offline Neighbor Kid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #96 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:07 »
80 - 100 would be a good test to do, I feel 80 players especially would be far more stable.

you start at 80 and push to 100 and see waht happens.. with how that went in PR i think 100 would work just fine almost a 30 player difference.. id put hopes for it working
http://i52.tinypic.com/245iq1l.jpg
My Day Begins When Your Days End

Offline Paasky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.801
  • DON'T PANIC! DON'T PANIC!
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #97 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:05 »
Although servers try to keep information as basic as possible to allow for today's modern online internet games, when the server has to send out those same packets of information to twice the number of people, it cannot keep up. Certainly a faster dedicated box would be able to handle the strain better, but I don't think that a powerful dedicated box could still keep up with the traffic demands on the game.

This is something I still find absolutely ridiculous. Battlefield 1942, released in 2002. 64 players on a server, no problem. Now, eight years later, with vastly more powerful servers and huge amounts of bandwidth, BF2 can't fully handle doubling the amount of players. Meanwhile EVE & WoW can handle thousands of players on one server, fairly close to each other.

DICE ave done many great things, but network coding has never been one of them.
It's half naked people on boats. That's all.
Here in Finland we call that "summer".

Offline Neighbor Kid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #98 on: 26-01-2011, 23:01:22 »
Although servers try to keep information as basic as possible to allow for today's modern online internet games, when the server has to send out those same packets of information to twice the number of people, it cannot keep up. Certainly a faster dedicated box would be able to handle the strain better, but I don't think that a powerful dedicated box could still keep up with the traffic demands on the game.

This is something I still find absolutely ridiculous. Battlefield 1942, released in 2002. 64 players on a server, no problem. Now, eight years later, with vastly more powerful servers and huge amounts of bandwidth, BF2 can't fully handle doubling the amount of players. Meanwhile EVE & WoW can handle thousands of players on one server, fairly close to each other.

DICE ave done many great things, but network coding has never been one of them.

well like i said yu dont need to do 128 do 100
http://i52.tinypic.com/245iq1l.jpg
My Day Begins When Your Days End

Offline Kev4000

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.039
  • FH2 "special" coder
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #99 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:39 »
It is against the EULA to hack the .exe. I am assuming they're using a hacked dedicated server executable. BF2 clients already support more than 64 players, you can run with up to 254 bots IIRC.

EA's reaction to this will be extremely interesting, if they react at all.
- It could extend the longevity of the BF2 engine, stopping people from buying newer games. But could see an increase in BF2 sales.
- If EA does blacklist servers running 128 players, their reputation will be shattered within the BF community.
They may be faced with a dilemma of sorts. But I hope they just ignore it and let the community do as they want.

Offline Archimonday

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.197
  • Sir vis pacem, para bellum!
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #100 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:18 »
I seriously doubt there was much .exe hacking here, every hotfix was server side, which tells me that there is a much simpler answer to all of this

Offline Dukat

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.041
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #101 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:16 »
Rofl.

You really think we are that silly ? We would do something against the EULA ? Damn.

And why would we give you details ? We keep our secrets secret boy. :P

Yes, i think you might have done something against the EULA, the way he described it. Thus I asked for details. Out of curiosity. I'm no coder, thus I'm not interested in details of your code anyway nor do I wanna use it in my Dukat-mod.

If this workaround comes with copyright infringements like all the others did before, I'd like to know before I actually get excited about it. Because then it is not gonna happen. So, calm down.

I usually imagine my own sounds with it, like `tjunk, tupdieyupdiedee` aaa enemy spotted, ratatatataboom

Offline Neighbor Kid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #102 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:01 »
It is against the EULA to hack the .exe. I am assuming they're using a hacked dedicated server executable. BF2 clients already support more than 64 players, you can run with up to 254 bots IIRC.

EA's reaction to this will be extremely interesting, if they react at all.
- It could extend the longevity of the BF2 engine, stopping people from buying newer games. But could see an increase in BF2 sales.
- If EA does blacklist servers running 128 players, their reputation will be shattered within the BF community.
They may be faced with a dilemma of sorts. But I hope they just ignore it and let the community do as they want.

i dont think they would and hope they dont if this is so the case.. but i t was stated earlier that the PR devs wouldnt do that..
http://i52.tinypic.com/245iq1l.jpg
My Day Begins When Your Days End

Offline Kev4000

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.039
  • FH2 "special" coder
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #103 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:49 »
I seriously doubt there was much .exe hacking here, every hotfix was server side, which tells me that there is a much simpler answer to all of this

The bf2_w32ded.exe I am guessing, not the BF2.exe. Which would just affect the server.

Offline Neighbor Kid

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Project Reality Online testing with 128 players
« Reply #104 on: 27-01-2011, 00:01:00 »
I seriously doubt there was much .exe hacking here, every hotfix was server side, which tells me that there is a much simpler answer to all of this

The bf2_w32ded.exe I am guessing, not the BF2.exe. Which would just affect the server.

what do you think woudl be the FH dev teams stand point though? as a whole.
« Last Edit: 27-01-2011, 00:01:01 by Neighbor Kid »
http://i52.tinypic.com/245iq1l.jpg
My Day Begins When Your Days End