Uh should we have stayed with the Source Engine/Orange Box?
Rothgar
Join Date: 2009-11-13 Member: 69372Members
Join Date: 2009-11-13 Member: 69372Members
Performance is really bad, not sure how many players you guys were testing the game with but yeah seems to need a lot of optimization work...
Plus a lot of work still to go on basic features like, RCON, console input on dedicated servers, chat messages printing in console.
I have spawned as a spectator on the battlefield etc.
Plus a lot of work still to go on basic features like, RCON, console input on dedicated servers, chat messages printing in console.
I have spawned as a spectator on the battlefield etc.
Comments
The alpha phase of the release life cycle is the first phase to begin Software testing. In this phase, developers generally test the software using white box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black box or gray box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release.
Alpha software can be unstable and could cause crashes or data loss.
The alpha phase usually ends with a feature freeze, indicating that no more features will be added to the software. At this time, the software is said to be feature complete.
Of course there will be performance issues.
My point is that this is the stage we are at now after waiting so much time...
I'm glad they ditched the source engine, seeing the amount of features they built into their own.
Dynamic Soft-Shadows, Self-Shadowing, High resolution textures... Don't get me wrong, the source engine is a great game engine but its very old :P
I'm glad they ditched the source engine, seeing the amount of features they built into their own.
Dynamic Soft-Shadows, Self-Shadowing, High resolution textures... Don't get me wrong, the source engine is a great game engine but its very old :P<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah but most engines are "old" and then built on top of.
I am expecting bugs, don't get me wrong, I just find it hard to believe that the game runs so poorly with < 12 players when people aren't doing much in the way of anything.
this.
anyone who expected to be playing this game without any problems last night is dumber then a rock.
where do you base this on? i like the source engine :/
I base it on results of valve porting CS and DoD the 2 games I played cometitivily before NS.
The big downside I see is lack of multi-threading in both of them. I believe the OB engine only does very small things in a separate thread like some/all particles?
One thing I see as a positive on the NS2 dedicated server is it was going past using a single core meaning hopefully it will be multi-threaded better than the OB engine for example.
I am just afraid it's going to take them a long time to optimize their own engine to a point where it's playable, has decent netcode to deal with all the players, anti-cheat engines, various crash bugs/exploits I assume will arise etc. Hopefully I am wrong.
And there is the possibility that the game might require a much better Rig than the original (written for source) minimum specs imply, that's always an issue when you're trying to do something awesome (look at the lighting, look at it!!!).
And there is the possibility that the game might require a much better Rig than the original (written for source) minimum specs imply, that's always an issue when you're trying to do something awesome (look at the lighting, look at it!!!).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah I do admit the graphics are looking nice.
I dont expect to see this game done this year. Early 2011 sounds like a good time frame for me. We will have a playable beta imo around christmas.
THings u need to change or add imo.
Better video card settings and things u can change.
A better server broswers that shows the ping in a number not in bars.
Bots and a tutorial mode that shows u how the game play works. Could have voice over tell u what to do like shadowrun(cool game) did.
Better esport support with tv streams and demo record and all the gameplay and anti cheat and balance.
Keep up the good work uwe
You can't compare 2 games on different engines, ofcourse its gonna be different.
Source is an awesome engine for being quick to pickup and almost infinited in potential (though people rarely take it that far).
<img src="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e47/mynameisme12/QUITYOBTCH.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Face palm deployed
As people said we need ping numbers not graphs like those ######-house console ports and a ping kick tool to alleviate any potential extra latency issues would be good.
I see a lot of errors on server stating "Client command is outside the available window for lag compensation".
Who knows maybe their lag compensation is slowing everyone down ;P
Invalid point. We know it is an alpha, but it should be at least in a playable state, like being able to connect to a game and run around. That is basic functionality which should work already. I am ok with very bad fps, this will get better if the minimum required specs are supposed to match up on release. But having fanboys attacking people is abit annoying. So I hope they fix the server connecting issues real quick, else there will be a lot of annoyed players and an early bad impression can be a problem. I for one, was not able to connect to any game, either it stalled on connecting, or it did connect and I feel through the floor and then it froze.
Source is an awesome engine for being quick to pickup and almost infinited in potential (though people rarely take it that far).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Err, CS:S and DOD:S are both on the Source engine. There's no "Orange Box" engine that I know of.
We realize it's an alpha, however It's hard to test something and give suggestions when the game is pretty unplayable.
Performance should be first on the list.
It is very very very very very limited in potential. No dynamic lighting (at least not in the current version), very limited on outdoor areas. Long load times, sound stuttering etc. Valve knows how to make great games with it because they can work around those limitations. But the engine is far behind in potential to for example Cryengine 2 or Unreal engine 3, which you can see on the amount of licensed games for each engine.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's no "Orange Box" engine that I know of.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OB is just the marketing label for a newer 2007 version of the engine.
Invalid point. We know it is an alpha, but it should be at least in a playable state, like being able to connect to a game and run around. That is basic functionality which should work already. I am ok with very bad fps, this will get better if the minimum required specs are supposed to match up on release. But having fanboys attacking people is abit annoying. So I hope they fix the server connecting issues real quick, else there will be a lot of annoyed players and an early bad impression can be a problem. I for one, was not able to connect to any game, either it stalled on connecting, or it did connect and I feel through the floor and then it froze.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah this is a bad bug, basically when the server is full it doesn't tell you (the client) I believe and your game sit there trying to connect which hammers the server with connect/disconnects which I believe also causes lag in the server.
Also I was advised that LAN servers/people who had not opened their ports may be getting their servers listed but they would obviously not be connectible.
Hopefully that will be fixed fairly soon.
So:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->but it should be at least in a playable state, like being able to connect to a game and run around.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes it should. You probably thikn 'wow they had videos where it worked!' guess what, the ammount of people playing now. The ammount of new systems. The new speccs for servers. The entirely new enviroment = bugs. Things are not going to work as expected.
When I played World of Warcraft : Wrath of the Lich King Alpha it was pooooooor. Like I mean really poor. Massive lag, high ammounts of DC, crashes, skill lag. I could keep going on.
Now that was alpha - going to BETA (where a few publics got acces) there was a COMPLETE revamp. My deathknight on lvl 76 (cap) was deleted. They were redesigned to the extent they didnt function in the new build.
So what did I see? All the issues, like baaaaaaad issues.
What did beta players see? A playable game with basics functions working. Alot of lag admitibly but far from the ammount of crashes and issues in the alpha. Most people could run the game, regardless of system specc.
<b><i>So what is the point?: You MUST realize ALPHA is NOT doing what it SHOULD. Errors are BAD and GINOURMEOUS they will RUIN your game. They will CRASH your game. They will prevent YOU from playing while others do. The game will be ######</i></b>
So why an alpha? Because it's the fastest way to get more fixes. A little thing to remember: <b>Normally people playing alpha are devs or Q&A teams. they get paid to play it. They dont play it because it's mad fun (though it eventually will be) but because it needs fixing. Dont expect to play NS2 for fun yet. Dont expect it before Beta.</b>
We realize it's an alpha, however It's hard to test something and give suggestions when the game is pretty unplayable.
Performance should be first on the list.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Performance should be first."
That sentence right there shows how much of a hypocrite you are.
Optimizing net code stability falls under that performance statement that you threw out there to try and make it like UNW have no clue what they are doing.
My point is that this is the stage we are at now after waiting so much time...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
wow I really dont wanna flame you but
seriously
small in house dev team with 3 people working off of a finite budget, and the game looks amazing. a lot of the core game is already in the alpha
at this point who isnt against just locking down new threads?
So:
Yes it should. You probably thikn 'wow they had videos where it worked!' guess what, the ammount of people playing now. The ammount of new systems. The new speccs for servers. The entirely new enviroment = bugs. Things are not going to work as expected.
When I played World of Warcraft : Wrath of the Lich King Alpha it was pooooooor. Like I mean really poor. Massive lag, high ammounts of DC, crashes, skill lag. I could keep going on.
Now that was alpha - going to BETA (where a few publics got acces) there was a COMPLETE revamp. My deathknight on lvl 76 (cap) was deleted. They were redesigned to the extent they didnt function in the new build.
So what did I see? All the issues, like baaaaaaad issues.
What did beta players see? A playable game with basics functions working. Alot of lag admitibly but far from the ammount of crashes and issues in the alpha. Most people could run the game, regardless of system specc.
<b><i>So what is the point?: You MUST realize ALPHA is NOT doing what it SHOULD. Errors are BAD and GINOURMEOUS they will RUIN your game. They will CRASH your game. They will prevent YOU from playing while others do. The game will be ######</i></b>
So why an alpha? Because it's the fastest way to get more fixes. A little thing to remember: <b>Normally people playing alpha are devs or Q&A teams. they get paid to play it. They dont play it because it's mad fun (though it eventually will be) but because it needs fixing. Dont expect to play NS2 for fun yet. Dont expect it before Beta.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with what you said, my point was and still is though, can they really spend the time to properly optimize and build a workable engine?
UWE is a small team of developers, your making reference to World of Warcraft? Looking at where the performance is now and thinking back to complaints about the "Engine" tests which were lets face it very similar to an Alpha minus the server aspect (People were giving feedback on different machine configurations and issues that were being faced) and people complaining of lag in there I would of expected it to be in a more playable state I guess.
I know for example on your MMO example there is an Open Source group who made an MMO called PlaneShift, this has taken a long time in dealing with engine optimizations etc and of course they have spent years on basically just optimizing their engine and netcode.
1: You payed for black armor.
2: You supported UWE
3: You were allowed to the alpha.
The only difference between a 'normal alpha' and this alpha, is that more people has acces to it. The game needs not to do more, nor behave differently than in any other alpha. The definition of alpha is not to debate, wether people like it or not and feel they've been cheated for money or not.
Edit: in reply to your Rothgar:
Yes I agree with you. However wether or not they can make it, has nothing to do with how the game plays right now. They decided to make the engine them selves, and hopefully they made the right choice. 1 not on the MMO comparison though: they have ~1-2000players / server. Requires a tad more optimization, but your point is valid. And all we can hope is they make it, which I have no doubt they will, eventually.
Remember at this point it could be compared to how Diablo III worked 2 years ago. The point being that you have to realise it's a game with all the child deseases there excists, all games have these at first. Depending on dev time, complexity etc. it's obviously variable how long it will take to fix.
And hence there's no telling if NS2 will be playable in 1 month or 2. Hell beta might first get out in 6 months or more. Just trying to say we need to cut them some slack.
I dont complain, its an alpha...
As for the should they have stuck with the source engine point, think of the oppertunities UWE have now to do anything they want without being restricted by somebody elses code ,its probably gonna make things alot easier for them in the long run.