Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

EQNext world is massive

2

Comments

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,072
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Don't believe until you see it...

    true. Those billions and millions are just PR hype. The game will not have 200 billion anything, it will most likely generate as you go. So expect a LOT of the same over and over. Companies love to count the same things as extra content.

     

    EDIT: i thought you were talking about Elite:Dangerous like other posters here. But yeah, same for EQN, believe it when i see it.





  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,830
    Originally posted by SlyLoK
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by SlyLoK

    Originally posted by Infantryonline I looked at the map shown in the AI panel and it describes the portion of mountains that meets Kithicor Woods as 35 different sections. I looked at the same region on the entire world map and the same region is very small compared to the rest of the map maybe 1/50 by my eyes. Forgelight is said to be potentially capable of 128km by 128km or 16400km square km. In perspective. Skyrim is 4.32 mi by 3.42 mi or 14.8 square mi or 38.2 km squared. Thats roughly 1000+ skyrims. That's amazing!
    Thats all well and good but how large can they get the world after moving to voxels? The islands of Landmark are really small and still it has issues ( not mentioning the horrible LOD for distant terrain / objects ). Until I see some world fly overs from EQN of a giant well crafted world I will hold out on having any hope.

     

    After moving to voxels? lol. They are already using voxels.

    They can make the worlds as large as they want without any impact from voxels because there is only a certain "Scope" to what has to be rendered at any given time.

    You misread what I said.. I am talking about what they had going for EQN prior to moving to voxels. If there isnt a performance hit then explain why Landmark runs like crap? On top of that as you move the game streams in new voxel sections which also causes a performance hit. Then that brings up the problem of how terrible the LOD at distance is... I wouldnt be surprised in the least if EQN gets scrapped again.

     

     What do you mean Landmark runs like crap? I have no issues at all running Landmark. Like Butter. Smooth average 55 to 70 fps maxed.  Perhaps an upgrade for you?

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,830
    Originally posted by rojoArcueid
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Don't believe until you see it...

    true. Those billions and millions are just PR hype. The game will not have 200 billion anything, it will most likely generate as you go. So expect a LOT of the same over and over. Companies love to count the same things as extra content.

     

    EDIT: i thought you were talking about Elite:Dangerous like other posters here. But yeah, same for EQN, believe it when i see it.

     

     

               Everquest is a huge game and so is EQ2 no reason to believe that EQN will not be too. They have a history in the franchise of making their worlds large why would that be any different now?

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by blueturtle13

    Originally posted by SlyLoK

    Originally posted by Nitth  

    Originally posted by SlyLoK

    Originally posted by Infantryonline I looked at the map shown in the AI panel and it describes the portion of mountains that meets Kithicor Woods as 35 different sections. I looked at the same region on the entire world map and the same region is very small compared to the rest of the map maybe 1/50 by my eyes. Forgelight is said to be potentially capable of 128km by 128km or 16400km square km. In perspective. Skyrim is 4.32 mi by 3.42 mi or 14.8 square mi or 38.2 km squared. Thats roughly 1000+ skyrims. That's amazing!
    Thats all well and good but how large can they get the world after moving to voxels? The islands of Landmark are really small and still it has issues ( not mentioning the horrible LOD for distant terrain / objects ). Until I see some world fly overs from EQN of a giant well crafted world I will hold out on having any hope.
      After moving to voxels? lol. They are already using voxels. They can make the worlds as large as they want without any impact from voxels because there is only a certain "Scope" to what has to be rendered at any given time.
    You misread what I said.. I am talking about what they had going for EQN prior to moving to voxels. If there isnt a performance hit then explain why Landmark runs like crap? On top of that as you move the game streams in new voxel sections which also causes a performance hit. Then that brings up the problem of how terrible the LOD at distance is... I wouldnt be surprised in the least if EQN gets scrapped again.
     

     What do you mean Landmark runs like crap? I have no issues at all running Landmark. Like Butter. Smooth average 55 to 70 fps maxed.  Perhaps an upgrade for you?


    Sigh. There is well known issues with frame rates that even the devs have acknowledged.

    Covering up issues never helped anyone.


    ....

    What i meant was there isnt any performance hit to adding more world space It will be the same performance because the client doesn't need to know much outside its "chunk".

    Now going from straight up pollys to Voxels would of been a huge hit to performance initially but i think that the possibilities with voxels far out way any hurdles they may need to overcome.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • blueturtle13blueturtle13 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,830

    Prove it or it never happened. Show us forum posts from developers. Show proof that there is framerate issues from the developers admit to that occur today.  Sorry I do not believe you. Why?

    Because I only have an A-10 6800K a  260X and 8 gigs of RAM and run the game amazingly well. I have no issues and neither does all but one guy in my guild group from EQ2 

    거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다












  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by blueturtle13
    Prove it or it never happened. Show us forum posts from developers. Show proof that there is framerate issues from the developers admit to that occur today.  Sorry I do not believe you. Why?Because I only have an A-10 6800K a  260X and 8 gigs of RAM and run the game amazingly well. I have no issues and neither does all but one guy in my guild group from EQ2 

    How about a whole month dedicated to performance tweaking because dave said "performance issues must die?

    Landmark live 2 weeks ago.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,096
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    EVE world is 120 Light years.

     

    beat that.

    90% which is barren and void.  Distance and size doesn't count unless it is filled with locales and denizens to explore.

     

    I'd 100X rather explore a fantastical setting then a barren empty space.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • Binny45Binny45 Member UncommonPosts: 518

    I see people here complaining about Landmark running like crap. Either:

    a) You need a hardware upgrade

    b) You have WAY too much crap running on your system.

    c) You're trying to run it over wireless network. ALL MMO's suffer latency over wireless. Get wired!

    It runs like silk on my rig, which is at most, taxes in, $1000. Not that expensive when you take into account good parts and a decent video card.

    I'm sincerely looking forward to what they bring to the table. Landmark is a genius way for SOE to kick the tires on their engine while letting the players have their way with it.  It's GORGEOUS!

    I can't wait to see a similar world populated with Mobs!

    image

  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904

     


    Originally posted by blueturtle13
    [mod edit]

     

    What is with the hostility?

    I'm a fan of the game, Have my founders pack, but there ARE issues that need to be addressed.

    The content of the Landmark live stream indicated that the devs were not happy with the performance of the client and said they can do much better. They have also been open about the fact there is no mulithreaded rendering subsystem which makes multi core cpus cripled.

    When that goes live within the next month its fullly expected to see a significant jump to frames for a lot of people that are having problems (in theory).

    Just because u, or your immediate friends don't have an issue, it doesn't mean there inst a problem for a significant amount of people.

    Acknowledge problems + Solve them = Better game.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,090
    Originally posted by Binny45

    I see people here complaining about Landmark running like crap. Either:

    a) You need a hardware upgrade

    b) You have WAY too much crap running on your system.

    c) You're trying to run it over wireless network. ALL MMO's suffer latency over wireless. Get wired!

    It runs like silk on my rig, which is at most, taxes in, $1000. Not that expensive when you take into account good parts and a decent video card.

    I'm sincerely looking forward to what they bring to the table. Landmark is a genius way for SOE to kick the tires on their engine while letting the players have their way with it.  It's GORGEOUS!

    I can't wait to see a similar world populated with Mobs!

    To some people anything less than a solid 80 FPS is crap.  Some people think 20FPS is "running amazingly well".  And Don't confuse FPS performance with internet latency.

    its all based on what you can tolerate.

  • Binny45Binny45 Member UncommonPosts: 518

    I honestly just grow weary of the bellyaching over a game that is still in beta.  It's BETA! Even if I was experiencing issues, I'd still sound dumb complaining about it because the game is not finished.  Granted, if the game was being released tomorrow and it was not up to snuff, yeah I'd then say my piece and NOT buy the game.

    I personally think SOE has done an admirable job on this. They obviously want this game to launch well. They're keeping the community in the loop and they're certainly not afraid to say what's wrong, and they are willing to fix it.  Cut them some slack.  Would you prefer they keep you in the dark until release and give you a half finished game?  I'd gladly pay a subscription for a polished product than play and of the free to play....stuff that's coming out these days.

    image

  • BigdaddyxBigdaddyx Member UncommonPosts: 2,039
    Originally posted by kosac
    if game is ugly and boring .. size dosnt matter..

    Yep..so we got nothing to worry about.

  • MavolenceMavolence Member UncommonPosts: 635
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    EVE world is 120 Light years.

     

    beat that.

    90% which is barren and void.  Distance and size doesn't count unless it is filled with locales and denizens to explore.

     

    I'd 100X rather explore a fantastical setting then a barren empty space.

    Well that is subjective though because i personally would prefer to explore the space and spend hours and hours roaming and looking for anomalies and offline pos's and all kinds of things to get into.

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Originally posted by Binny45

    I see people here complaining about Landmark running like crap. Either:

    a) You need a hardware upgrade

    b) You have WAY too much crap running on your system.

    c) You're trying to run it over wireless network. ALL MMO's suffer latency over wireless. Get wired!

    It runs like silk on my rig, which is at most, taxes in, $1000. Not that expensive when you take into account good parts and a decent video card.

    C made a big difference for me a while back. Had no issues with gaming then noticed my aim was off in FPS type games. Was too lazy to figure out the sudden issue and just ran a cable to my modem. Problem solved plus better then it ever was wireless.

    So many things that can cause issues due to hardware/software not playing nice, yet people almost always jump to the conclusion that a game/software is to blame. Could be, but worth doing our part as well.

    My machine cost less and still runs Landmark well enough. A year or two down the line, better parts will be half the price. People want all the shiny goodness but need to realize a cost comes with it. Not that optimization isn't a huge help as well.

  • VutarVutar Member UncommonPosts: 916
    Landmark runs horribly at the moment. SOE should really work on fixing that at some point rather than continuing to focus on new features. It lacks responsiveness for your character. WoW's popularity and the reason it is still going strong today has a large part to do with how the game "feels." You feel completely in control of your character. Right now that is lacking in landmark and that worries me for EQnext. Every new MMO I have seen that lacks responsiveness claims "it is just beta" and then never fixes it for launch. I want to see SOE fix it in beta. At this point landmark control wise feels like a console port to PC which is why I rarely log into it. It worries me for EQnext.
  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,089
    Originally posted by Vutar
    Landmark runs horribly at the moment. SOE should really work on fixing that at some point rather than continuing to focus on new features. It lacks responsiveness for your character. WoW's popularity and the reason it is still going strong today has a large part to do with how the game "feels." You feel completely in control of your character. Right now that is lacking in landmark and that worries me for EQnext. Every new MMO I have seen that lacks responsiveness claims "it is just beta" and then never fixes it for launch. I want to see SOE fix it in beta. At this point landmark control wise feels like a console port to PC which is why I rarely log into it. It worries me for EQnext.

    While I agree that it is possible that it won't get any better, they've said their engineer/programmer team is on it. Obviously results speak louder though.

    To say it runs horribly though is very case by case. It doesn't run horribly for me. Be it my machine or pure luck. Same for many others one way or the other. I do not have a top of the line PC so either those suffering either have fairly old machines or bad luck to a combo of hardware/drivers or whatever not all working together.

    I've seen people post almost identical builds with totally different results. Guessing optimization should bring a lot of this in line, but could be another EQ2. Time will tell.

  • RobokappRobokapp Member RarePosts: 6,110
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    EVE world is 120 Light years.

     

    beat that.

    90% which is barren and void.  Distance and size doesn't count unless it is filled with locales and denizens to explore.

     

    I'd 100X rather explore a fantastical setting then a barren empty space.

    See post #25.

    image

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    Originally posted by Infantryonline
    I looked at the map shown in the AI panel and it describes the portion of mountains that meets Kithicor Woods as 35 different sections. I looked at the same region on the entire world map and the same region is very small compared to the rest of the map maybe 1/50 by my eyes. Forgelight is said to be potentially capable of 128km by 128km or 16400km square km. In perspective. Skyrim is 4.32 mi by 3.42 mi or 14.8 square mi or 38.2 km squared. Thats roughly 1000+ skyrims. That's amazing!

     

    One can only hope for a world that large. Reason being that mounts and teleportation shards should be in so making the world that much bigger should help the redundant feeling fast travel gives a world. Being able to get within the vicinity but still having to get there yourself, it will be a balance to be sure. I like to walk a bit.

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
    Originally posted by Robokapp
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    EVE world is 120 Light years.

     

    beat that.

    90% which is barren and void.  Distance and size doesn't count unless it is filled with locales and denizens to explore.

     

    I'd 100X rather explore a fantastical setting then a barren empty space.

    See post #25.

         I look at this way..  Elite Dangerous will have over 1 BILLION points of interest, that will be physically impossible to visit in a lifetime..  I hope Elite Dangerous uses some form of exploration and adventure reward/point system similar to WoW or WoT and other games..  I would love to be recognized that I visited 300 planets, or shot down 200 pirates.. etc etc.. 

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,573
    Originally posted by Tamanous
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    EVE world is 120 Light years.

     

    beat that.

    ... of empty space.

     

    Amazing how easy it is to design ... nothing!

     

    To design nothing is to cease all thought, all existence - it's beyond human capability.

    True nothingness is the most impossible task to achieve.

     

     

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,573
    Originally posted by Infantryonline
    I looked at the map shown in the AI panel and it describes the portion of mountains that meets Kithicor Woods as 35 different sections. I looked at the same region on the entire world map and the same region is very small compared to the rest of the map maybe 1/50 by my eyes. Forgelight is said to be potentially capable of 128km by 128km or 16400km square km. In perspective. Skyrim is 4.32 mi by 3.42 mi or 14.8 square mi or 38.2 km squared. Thats roughly 1000+ skyrims. That's amazing!

    Umm.. yeah, talk about making stuff up based on limited information.

     

    The truth is - you're extrapolating and guessing - there is no actual information about EQNext world size at this time.

    None.

     

  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,573
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Don't believe until you see it...

    Bingo

  • ArskaaaArskaaa Member RarePosts: 1,260

    i hope combat will be more smooth and better then current Landmark combat.

  • SulherokSulherok Member UncommonPosts: 22
    I used to run like 20-35 FPS in Landmark so i decided to turn shadow setting down to Low and now i run the game at between 60-85.
  • SupaAPESupaAPE Member Posts: 100
    Originally posted by Sulherok
    I used to run like 20-35 FPS in Landmark so i decided to turn shadow setting down to Low and now i run the game at between 60-85.

    Most games i've ever played, shadows were always the most taxing on the performance of the game.

Sign In or Register to comment.