Jump to content
Dante Unbound: Share Bug Reports and Feedback Here! ×

Player to player connection=horrible idea


darkone96
 Share

Recommended Posts

THey can't fix people having bad internet.

What they could add is better localistion, or the ablility to start your own game... better matchmaking in general.

Dedicated servers would be nice, but cost. Perhaps in the future when more people have helped support the game... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion to this problem (well aside from dedicated server option) would be implement a method where the player with the best internet connection will automatically be the host. In addition, there should be a placeholder internet speed requirement to be allowed to host unless solo. Reason why I think that is more reasonable is because I'd rather not play at all if it meant having someone's bad internet ruin mine and everyone else's game-play. This is especially true for guns with slower projectile speed like the bolt guns or guns with slower fire rate as the mobs tend to jump all over the place.

Edit: I am talking about upload speed in this case when I mention "internet speed."

Edited by Ambience
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an upload issue.

Downstream is cheap, but upstream is often limited. Most people have asynchronous internet connections, and as a result, hosting is bad if their connections are poor. But they are also screwed when playing as clients, because they cannot update the host fast enough with positional data - and it blows. :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an upload issue.

Downstream is cheap, but upstream is often limited. Most people have asynchronous internet connections, and as a result, hosting is bad if their connections are poor. But they are also screwed when playing as clients, because they cannot update the host fast enough with positional data - and it blows. :/

Before I got Fios I used to have DSL and hosting was a bad idea for me when playing games, but if someone else hosted I was just fine. I would much rather the system allow someone with an upload speed that allows at the minimum of 4 people play without much issue rather than someone with crappy upload.

Edited by Ambience
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have an option where you can volunteer as a host in general; if no one can be found than you have to get a game going with a bad connection. Still better than the constant hosting from people with toasters and 56k modems. Although i assume most people don't even know there's a chance they have to host, they most likely assume it happens "somewhere".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P2P connections are fine in general, just not under the current hosting options. I believe we at the very least need the following tools or in-game services:

- Host Online Game

- Regional filter in options (eg. while playing with people in California is an option that can work if everyone has great connections [i'm in Denmark], I'd rather be able to have a "no players online" sign in general.)

- Max Ping to Host filter in options

- If multiple squads are available, priority is given to squads with lower ping

- Don't re-connect to a squad you just disconnected from (this is annoying beyond belief, since I usually abort due to massive lag)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P2P connections are fine in general, just not under the current hosting options. I believe we at the very least need the following tools or in-game services:

- Host Online Game

- Regional filter in options (eg. while playing with people in California is an option that can work if everyone has great connections [i'm in Denmark], I'd rather be able to have a "no players online" sign in general.)

- Max Ping to Host filter in options

- If multiple squads are available, priority is given to squads with lower ping

- Don't re-connect to a squad you just disconnected from (this is annoying beyond belief, since I usually abort due to massive lag)

yeees, and a game list of all those matches that fit your criteria :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devs, please respond.

Bump.

You can stop those bumps right now. I'll answer you.

The current infrastructure of Warframe works like the dungeon crawlers of old. Back when we had IPX networks with BNC copper cables and terminator resistors, we would play like this. Someone opened a game, the others joined on him, like Diablo I. It was a LAN thing, though. Then, as the internet became more and more a thing, we dropped IPX and switched to TCP/IP. Eventually, we had steady internet and started playing like that. Diablo II, for example. Oh boy, that was fun. Today, games still work like this. Terraria, for example. Or Torchlight 2, too. It's a simple and inexpensive way for gamers to get together in small groups and play together.

On the other hand, rebuilding the network stack, netcode and connection manager to dedicated server requires development time - time which DE doesn't have. Furthermore, running dedi servers for thousands of 1 to 4 player sessions is quite the load. Calculating the AI for those thousands of sessions burns through CPU time like no tomorrow. Those servers would have to be powerful, all over the world, maintained, need backup systems, failover cluster partners and what not. That is a huge chunk of money, a huge chunk of time and a huge chunk of new personell.

How like is it that Warframe will ever be on a dedicated server base over peer to peer? Diverging towards zero.

No future bumps necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...