Why is host migration a thang still?

[RazerXPrime]

3 hours ago, Loza03 said:

Netflix is also worth 20 billion dollars. I don't have enough knowledge in this subject to know for sure, but I DO know that plenty of way bigger studios than DE use P2P for reasons along these lines.

I'm not defending the move away from p2p as you can read in my earlier post. I'm just contesting the idea of having to buy servers. That's something that was a thing in the early 2000s.

[TANKSAVE]

I get that dedicated servers are expensive and it's easier/cheaper to use p2p, but even p2p shouldn't dump items you already received just because the host's internet cut out. We have game modes designed that you can play them for long periods of time but there are many people who refuse to run them because at any point the connection could break and all that steel essence you got from that 2 hour long survival mission is just gone. I can't think of any other game that retroactively takes something from you because someone else left the mission. DE doesn't need to start using dedicated servers to have the game save mission rewards between waves in an endless mission. 

[nslay]

4 hours ago, TANKSAVE said:

I get that dedicated servers are expensive and it's easier/cheaper to use p2p, but even p2p shouldn't dump items you already received just because the host's internet cut out. We have game modes designed that you can play them for long periods of time but there are many people who refuse to run them because at any point the connection could break and all that steel essence you got from that 2 hour long survival mission is just gone. I can't think of any other game that retroactively takes something from you because someone else left the mission. DE doesn't need to start using dedicated servers to have the game save mission rewards between waves in an endless mission. 

I couldn't have said it better!

[Birdframe_Prime]

On 2021-05-05 at 1:39 AM, nslay said:

Long term cost: "DE" becomes synonymous with low quality multiplayer gaming (if not already).

For instuting a method to try and fix P2P gaming and making sure that even players with rubbish connections aren't excluded from playing as long as there are other players within their area?

I don't think so.

[SneakyErvin]

On 2021-05-05 at 2:28 PM, RazerXPrime said:

Imagine the fallout when WF has dedicated servers and they crash forcing EVERYONE to lose their progress. People would love to go back to that once in a blue moon host migration that messes things up. 

 

On 2021-05-05 at 5:30 PM, RazerXPrime said:

Host migration is only an issue for pubs. For friends and clans and solo play this is not an issue. And for those that want server side play, a server setup will ruin everyone's experience when they have issues. Not just the people that go into pubs. I say leave it as it is and those that enjoy pubs, deal with this side effect. Don't bring your sorrow into other peoples experience. Adjust ping so you're not matched with somene on the other side of the planet.

Those "ruin everyone's experience" incidents are so few and far in between that they shouldnt really even be considered. You are more or less making up scenarios that barely exsist. And with WF it could be a complete non issue, since there would be no reason to remove how solo play works, nor would there be a reason to remove optional peer-to-peer for pre-mades. So you'd have dedicated servers for pugs, which would be immensly more stable than relying on the current matchmaker and the roulette nature of ending up with mister potato and wi-fi addict hosts. And those pre-mades with people that love tinfoil theories regarding dedicated server crashes could keep their PtP connections to eachother, and live in a happy Jerry Fletcher world, sharing those theories as they wipe out the corpus, grineer and everything else.

In the end everyone would win.

edit: And to put your chicken little scenario into perspective. The chance of losing your progress is as bigger now than it would be with dedicated servers, since you are already abiding by dedicated server rules for all your progress, plus you are controlled by an external hosting player. So currently you have two different ways to lose your progress in a missions.

#1 = Failed host migs.

#2 = The database server failing after a mission, resulting in no progress or rewards from said mission.

[--EC--Adrenaline]

To fix host migration you'd have to fix people's bad internet

Or keep begging DE for dedicated servers as we've all done for years

[nslay]

54 minutes ago, Birdframe_Prime said:

For instuting a method to try and fix P2P gaming and making sure that even players with rubbish connections aren't excluded from playing as long as there are other players within their area?

I don't think so.

The constant complaints on the forums, the constant requests for dedicated servers (even if I don't agree with this), lost loot and lost game progress speak for themselves. The current method is extremely bad for players. It's very apparent and simple: a bad/limited method.

Now I've provided a theoretical design that solves the problem while preserving your precious P2P aspect. Barring intractability of implementing that, I've offered workarounds (that already exist in the game) for the current bad-for-players system to make it less bad (because it's bad).

[RazerXPrime]

24 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

 

#1 = Failed host migs.

#2 = The database server failing after a mission, resulting in no progress or rewards from said mission.

1. only an issue for pubs. Not for me.

2. Still an issue with server side managing.

 

In what way are servers better for me? You said I would win. I never have the issue mentioned here in this topic because I don't play with pubs.

You're just telling me that you want me (someone who never has issues) to pay so you can play with pubs and fix an issue that hardly ever happens and certainly never happens to me. Host migration isn't the issue. The small chance of losing your progress or running into bugs is an issue. I've never lost progress or failed my mission due to host migrations.

I've played League of Legends for an extended amount of time. They have a huge server environment. They constantly have issues. Not just from their own systems not functioning or updates gone wrong, but also because their servers are targetted by hackers and angry players DDOSSing their systems. Every few matches you play you'd run into lag, disconnects, complete shutdowns of systems.

On what planet would we benefit for paying for something like that? People are acting like having a hosted server environment is some sort of magical cure that will make everything better. I mean do you actually know what you're talking about or are you just hoping this solution will fix your issues?

[nslay]

1 minute ago, RazerXPrime said:

I've played League of Legends for an extended amount of time. They have a huge server environment. They constantly have issues. Not just from their own systems not functioning or updates gone wrong, but also because their servers are targetted by hackers and angry players DDOSSing their systems. Every few matches you play you'd run into lag, disconnects, complete shutdowns of systems.

I'm not advocating a server-side solution... but League of Legends is a different game with a different design. Not all games hosted by servers have such constant issues... for example, in its hayday with the release of the Diablo 3 Reaper of Souls expansion, the game was in a pretty good state and still managed well at the time. Servers problem were rare (far rarer than host migrations in this game!).

And you know what the complaint about Diablo 3 is? Single player needs a server... People constantly ask for an offline mode. NOBODY complains about multiplayer issues though... like we see here in Warframe.

4 minutes ago, RazerXPrime said:

On what planet would we benefit for paying for something like that? People are acting like having a hosted server environment is some sort of magical cure that will make everything better. I mean do you actually know what you're talking about or are you just hoping this solution will fix your issues?

For a good, well-managed design, it almost certainly would be a magical cure. This system is awful.

I still believe it's possible to make a P2P design that isn't bad to players... and I explained how it might be done earlier in this thread.

[RazerXPrime]

3 minutes ago, nslay said:

For a good, well-managed design, it almost certainly would be a magical cure. This system is awful.

I still believe it's possible to make a P2P design that isn't bad to players... and I explained how it might be done earlier in this thread.

I would only agree to this if it came with a membership fee to allow the use of these servers for pubs only. So I can go ahead and play for free without worry and people that want to aggravate themselves with pubs can pay a monthly fee and then come onto the forums to complain about that when it doesn't work.

[Zimzala]

16 minutes ago, nslay said:

The constant complaints on the forums...

...are not an indication of a statistically large enough portion of the population from which to draw conclusions, IME.

I think the actual numbers are over-blown by raging gamers, if we are just going to use forum posts as a metric.

I have 'lost' some 'progression' in WF due to bugs, but it's not like one cannot eat because of it.

I am not advocating to not try and make teh system better, progress is awesome, but trying to use forum complaints as a valid metric to gauge this is disingenuous IMO.

IME, like so many things, gamers "make mountains out of mole hills", as it were, about this topic.

In the end, it's just virtual items that will disappear when the game goes offline, or just plain old forgotten and left behind when one moves to the next game.

It's just ephemeral dopamine, not an investment, and IMO, should be treated as such.

[nslay]

2 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

I am not advocating to not try and make teh system better, progress is awesome, but trying to use forum complaints as a valid metric to gauge this is disingenuous IMO.

Maybe. But we can objectively evaluate the consequences of a failed host migrations... and it's currently not very nice to players. Players that do post usually post after losing lots of progression or losing something relatively rare (our OP lost the Acceltra BP, someone else in the past lost Stalker's Smoking Body Ephemera or one of his other parts).

Now DE has implemented strategies to make this less of a terrible experience. Aside of the amazing engineering they put into their P2P system (it is a miracle that it works what with NATs and firewalls everywhere!)... DE has allowed players to "rejoin squad" which gives some of the rotation rewards back (not affinity or picked up stuff though). Ordis will mail cracked relic rewards from Void fissures, and bounties just deposit Phase rewards directly into inventory. So DE knows this is a terrible experience for players.

But as to the rest of your post... I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss players who play more seriously. I don't see anything wrong with somebody really fixated on farming an item or achieving some personal goal. In other words, this is not the player's fault for viewing their own progression in a more serious light, and I certainly don't fault them for being angry when something like this happens!

[Rakosta_Kai]

7 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

...are not an indication of a statistically large enough portion of the population from which to draw conclusions, IME

With no disrespect to you, this has been an evergreen complaint for my entire time in the game.

Like you, I am not advocating any specific action based on random commentary from forum-goers but the fact that server/migration issues as a source of complaint existing since the game came out of closed beta isn't speculation... That's fact.

 

Funnily enough, with Tencent owning DE now there really isn't a better time to look at ways to potentially address the problem permanently.

[Zimzala]

11 minutes ago, nslay said:

But as to the rest of your post... I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss players who play more seriously. I don't see anything wrong with somebody really fixated on farming an item or achieving some personal goal. In other words, this is not the player's fault for viewing their own progression in a more serious light, and I certainly don't fault them for being angry when something like this happens!

And having had a friend lose 'everything' from taking a video game too seriously, I will continue to advocate viewing these things as nothing more than ephemeral dopamine entertainment outlets.

It's just a video game for entertainment, nothing more and it's not healthy to wrap ones well being into a video game one cannot control, IME.

 

10 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

Funnily enough, with Tencent owning DE now there really isn't a better time to look at ways to potentially address the problem permanently.

Sure, If the game can be made 'better', that's a good thing.

 

TBH, in decades of playing games and dealing with bugs, I simply see all bugs as the 'fickle gods screwing with us' in the virtual worlds we inhabit, especially in a game like this where reality itself gets molded and screwed with...I find it to be a much healthier attitude than "DE does not care about us".

[nslay]

1 minute ago, Zimzala said:

And having had a friend lose 'everything' from taking a video game too seriously, I will continue to advocate viewing these things as nothing more than ephemeral dopamine entertainment outlets and nothing more.

It's just a video game for entertainment, nothing more and it's not healthy to wrap ones well being into ta video game one cannot control, IME.

I think your extreme example is not representative of everyone who plays with some seriousness... this doesn't necessarily mean they're mentally ill to the point that they could lose everything over a video game. You're being disingenuous here.

I do not fault players like OP for being angry at losing something rare due to a bad multiplayer system. It's not their fault that the game has a less-than-perfect multiplayer design.

[Zimzala]

1 minute ago, nslay said:

I think your extreme example is not representative of everyone who plays with some seriousness... this doesn't necessarily mean they're mentally ill to the point that they could lose everything over a video game. You're being disingenuous here.

I do not fault players like OP for being angry at losing something rare due to a bad multiplayer system. It's not their fault that the game has a less-than-perfect multiplayer design.

I call it a cautionary tale.

You can think I am being disingenuous, I will continue to use it as a primary example of teh slippery slope of taking a video game 'seriously'.

I am not 'faulting' anyone for anything, IMO, trying to lay 'blame' and 'fault' is the whole problem in teh first place, over just accepting that there are technical limitations to reality.

The world in it's entirety is less than perfect, why does there have the be 'blame' and 'fault'?

Angry humans will always rage when they feel slighted, regardless of reality.

[RazerXPrime]

11 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

Funnily enough, with Tencent owning DE now there really isn't a better time to look at ways to potentially address the problem permanently.

Why would this make a difference?

2 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

And having had a friend lose 'everything' from taking a video game too seriously, I will continue to advocate viewing these things as nothing more than ephemeral dopamine entertainment outlets and nothing more.

It's just a video game for entertainment, nothing more and it's not healthy to wrap ones well being into ta video game one cannot control, IME.

I agree, but a lot of people invest into these things as if it is the most important thing in their life. It's really sad, but it's also true. I'm not saying we should cater to them specifically, but they will always exist.

[Rakosta_Kai]

2 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

TBH, in decades of playing games and dealing with bugs, I simply see all bugs as the 'fickle gods screwing with us' in the virtual worlds we inhabit, especially in a game like this where reality itself gets molded and screwed with...I find it to be a much healthier attitude than "DE does not care about us".

I've got decades in online games too and don't entirely disagree with your assertion of them— That said, this thread (just like the bulk of threads in this forum) is essentially theorycrafting ways to fix a stated problem. 

In this case, what you are arguing is a perspective and those can differ based on the person in question. 

You might not see it as a big deal but there may also be that person who is "wi-flagged" who seems to have it happen any time they pick up something valuable.

Differing perspectives... 

[Zimzala]

5 minutes ago, RazerXPrime said:

I agree, but a lot of people invest into these things as if it is the most important thing in their life. It's really sad, but it's also true. I'm not saying we should cater to them specifically, but they will always exist.

IMO/IME, that portion of the population is 'at risk' and these games are inherently dangerous for some brain chemistries. 

If anything, IMO, we should be recognizing this behavior is not healthy.

Why do you think WF has warnings in many parts of the world to get up and step away after a time?

I live from the POV that those among us that are at risk should be protected as best we can, while allowing us the freedom to have games like this that might cause them harm.

It's a tough balancing act...

[Rakosta_Kai]

3 minutes ago, RazerXPrime said:

Why would this make a difference?

Tencent has actual money and access to servers already.

I've little doubt that when DE heard they got acquired by Tencent a great deal of cake-walking ensued just due to the potential access to capital...

[Zimzala]

7 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

I've got decades in online games too and don't entirely disagree with your assertion of them— That said, this thread (just like the bulk of threads in this forum) is essentially theorycrafting ways to fix a stated problem. 

In this case, what you are arguing is a perspective and those can differ based on the person in question. 

You might not see it as a big deal but there may also be that person who is "wi-flagged" who seems to have it happen any time they pick up something valuable.

Differing perspectives... 

There are multiple ways that the issue could be dealt with, all of which, IMO, DE are already intimately familiar with since you know, they make games and write code for a living, even if those technologies are not currently in WF.

So, theory crafting is awesome and all, but the fixes, as it were, have not changed in decades so IMO, there is very little left to craft, been solving these kinds of things for a couple decades myself.

I am well aware that I am an emotional anomaly, I get called out for being Vulcan a lot, because I don't see any reason to lose my mind over rewards in a video game.

[RazerXPrime]

2 minutes ago, Padre_Akais said:

Tencent has actual money and access to servers already.

I've little doubt that when DE heard they got acquired by Tencent a great deal of cake-walking ensued just due to the potential access to capital...

DE wasn't directly acquired by Tencent. DE has been part of Leyou for many years. DE being 10-20% of all of Leyou earnings. Leyou was acquired by Tencent. Not sure what that means in this case because you need ROI for things to work. You can't just say they have more money so they should do XYZ. I mean that's incredibly naieve.

[Rakosta_Kai]

2 minutes ago, RazerXPrime said:

DE wasn't directly acquired by Tencent. DE has been part of Leyou for many years. DE being 10-20% of all of Leyou earnings. Leyou was acquired by Tencent. Not sure what that means in this case because you need ROI for things to work. You can't just say they have more money so they should do XYZ. I mean that's incredibly naieve.

You are certainly welcome to your opinions, I'm afraid I don't find them particularly informed though...

For example, Warframe accounted for closer to 80% (175m) of Leyou's revenue generation in 2019— No one can speak to 2020 as they got bought out by Tencent then.  Where you got "10-20%" is anyone's guess...

Additionally, It's not like Tencent hasn't already released Warframe on their own cloud platform (WeGame) already as well... 

Or that you can't already download it from the Epic Games (Also ostensibly Tencent's) store either...

Put simply, DE has never had a publisher for Warframe with pockets as deep or as many resources in place...  So the actual question would be whether DE wants Tencent to help push the publishing on the game or not at this point.

Those are simply facts... You are welcome to stick with your assertions of naivete though if they make you feel good. 

 

 

[Krankbert]

On 2021-05-06 at 5:51 PM, RazerXPrime said:

1. only an issue for pubs. Not for me.

2. Still an issue with server side managing.

 

In what way are servers better for me? You said I would win. I never have the issue mentioned here in this topic because I don't play with pubs.

You're just telling me that you want me (someone who never has issues) to pay so you can play with pubs and fix an issue that hardly ever happens and certainly never happens to me. Host migration isn't the issue. The small chance of losing your progress or running into bugs is an issue.

It is an issue. The fact that it's not your issue doesn't mean that it's not an issue. You're not the measure of what is or isn't an issue. Stop being so cartoonishly narcissistic.

On 2021-05-06 at 6:44 PM, Zimzala said:

Angry humans will always rage when they feel slighted, regardless of reality.

Oh hey, it's Zimzala defending the status quo and insulting people who don't like it while constantly proclaiming how not seriously he's taking things. Sounds like I'm in every thread where someone criticizes anything.

[RazerXPrime]

5 hours ago, Padre_Akais said:

Those are simply facts... You are welcome to stick with your assertions of naivete though if they make you feel good. 

And you're welcome to believe that larger companies don't care about return on investment.

I just checked financial statements for Leyou and DE for 2019 and it seems that after letting go of their food business Leyou lost a lot of their revenue and DE became a bigger part. As per the financial records Leyou had a revenue of 214M of which 70M was DE. Since DE and Leyou do not have open books on subsidiaries this last part comes from an external source that may or may not be trustworthy (growjo).

If it is correct then DE comprises about 30% of Leyou.