Can you name even one Unity game that has decent performances when rendering graphically complicated scenes (high quality graphics, massive battles, large number of objects, long draw distance, fancy lighting effects, etc.)?
Can you name even one game that has "massive battles" at all?
Can you name even one Unity game that has decent performances when rendering graphically complicated scenes (high quality graphics, massive battles, large number of objects, long draw distance, fancy lighting effects, etc.)?
Can you name even one game that has "massive battles" at all?
You get the point....
Crowfall reached ~90 in a pretty small area during Siege Perilous, Gloria Victis had nearly 70 if I'm correct in largest castle sieges, RUST ~50. From what I've seen they suffer extreme frame rate drop and stuttering when Unity is pushed that far. So I guess that a massive battle is not something we'll see on Unity anytime soon.
Crowfall reached ~90 in a pretty small area during Siege Perilous, Gloria Victis had nearly 70 if I'm correct in largest castle sieges, RUST ~50. From what I've seen they suffer extreme frame rate drop and stuttering when Unity is pushed that far. So I guess that a massive battle is not something we'll see on Unity anytime soon.
Yeah, unlike all the other games doing +100 men battles with top notch graphics and no performance issues...
Why being constructive and address the point one makes when you can rant/bash/sling mud instead...
Crowfall reached ~90 in a pretty small area during Siege Perilous, Gloria Victis had nearly 70 if I'm correct in largest castle sieges, RUST ~50. From what I've seen they suffer extreme frame rate drop and stuttering when Unity is pushed that far. So I guess that a massive battle is not something we'll see on Unity anytime soon.
Yeah, unlike all the other games doing +100 men battles with top notch graphics and no performance issues...
Why being constructive and address the point one makes when you can rant/bash/sling mud instead...
When I read your reply yesterday, I wasn't sure if you were asking for massive PvP battle on Unity or in online video games in general. The former seemed more likely since there are countless games featuring graphically complicated scenes (like a massive PvP battle) with decent performances on other engines.
francis_baud said: there are countless games featuring graphically complicated scenes (like a massive PvP battle) with decent performances on other engines.
francis_baud said: there are countless games featuring graphically complicated scenes (like a massive PvP battle) with decent performances on other engines.
francis_baud said: there are countless games featuring graphically complicated scenes (like a massive PvP battle) with decent performances on other engines.
...and yet, you are still not naming any.
How can you be gamer and ask such a question? It is a forum and everyone has opinions, but asking dumb questions is not a good way to make your point.
Good. Do you know how the game manage to keep performance?
They threw security out of the window and went for minimal server side checks otherwise such battles would be impossible. "Feature" of Korean games.
The point is, it has nothing to do with rendering that is in fact the simpler pat of the engine. Large PVP battles are demanding server side - CPU power and mostly bandwidth that increase quadratically with each player on the screen. It is still technically very difficult to achieve(not worth the pursue) and why there are so few games actually capable of doing so, and those that do come with some severe sacrifice - being it physics, security like BDO or design, ie EVE Online.
I am not defending Unity or w/e, I am just pointing out that issue with large scale PVP is a problem for any engine and there is no simple solution. There is no engine that will do everything you want, closest is the one you built yourself and even then you will have to make lots of compromises.
At the end, game engine is just a tool and as such it depends how you use it.
Good. Do you know how the game manage to keep performance?
They threw security out of the window and went for minimal server side checks otherwise such battles would be impossible. "Feature" of Korean games.
The point is, it has nothing to do with rendering that is in fact the simpler pat of the engine. Large PVP battles are demanding server side - CPU power and mostly bandwidth that increase quadratically with each player on the screen. It is still technically very difficult to achieve(not worth the pursue) and why there are so few games actually capable of doing so, and those that do come with some severe sacrifice - being it physics, security like BDO or design, ie EVE Online.
I am not defending Unity or w/e, I am just pointing out that issue with large scale PVP is a problem for any engine and there is no simple solution. There is no engine that will do everything you want, closest is the one you built yourself and even then you will have to make lots of compromises.
At the end, game engine is just a tool and as such it depends how you use it.
Honest question:
Over the years Processing power, Server and Internet tech have improved dramatically. In light of that, why does it seem that large scale pvp has improved so modestly?
Over the years Processing power, Server and Internet tech have improved dramatically. In light of that, why does it seem that large scale pvp has improved so modestly?
Let's say you arrive in a zone and no one else is there. You start running around and with each change of a vector you send a packet to server, and you recieve one back.
Now, you bump into a player. You send a packet, you get 2 packets back. However, from the server perspective, server is receiving 2 packets, sending out 4.
So far so good?
Imagine there are 20 players in the zone. Server will recieve 20 packets and send 20x20 out, that is 400 packets.
Now, when you make it 100 players in the zone, it suddenly jumps up to 10 000 packets(100x100).
That is just for single update of a single spot in the game. Now, how many updates you need to make per second, how much data you transmit and how many people you have on the server, what is their density, etc?
While this is just a core principle of the issue(likely simplified) and there are many methods how to control it, it still adds up incredibly fast.
Yes, tech advanced but so did games.
However, it is imo more of a design thing, there is simply no demand for such gameplay and due technical difficulties, it still remains beyond reach of "common feature" of an average MMO.
Good. Do you know how the game manage to keep performance?
They threw security out of the window and went for minimal server side checks otherwise such battles would be impossible. "Feature" of Korean games.
The point is, it has nothing to do with rendering that is in fact the simpler pat of the engine. Large PVP battles are demanding server side - CPU power and mostly bandwidth that increase quadratically with each player on the screen. It is still technically very difficult to achieve(not worth the pursue) and why there are so few games actually capable of doing so, and those that do come with some severe sacrifice - being it physics, security like BDO or design, ie EVE Online.
I am not defending Unity or w/e, I am just pointing out that issue with large scale PVP is a problem for any engine and there is no simple solution. There is no engine that will do everything you want, closest is the one you built yourself and even then you will have to make lots of compromises.
At the end, game engine is just a tool and as such it depends how you use it.
I appreciate the explanation, but independently of back-end server tech and security, the point remains that Unity visibly can not handle graphically complicated scenes (including massive PvP) at decent performances while other engines can.
If we tried to render the equivalent of those scenes on Unity: it would likely melt down.
Good. Do you know how the game manage to keep performance?
They threw security out of the window and went for minimal server side checks otherwise such battles would be impossible. "Feature" of Korean games.
The point is, it has nothing to do with rendering that is in fact the simpler pat of the engine. Large PVP battles are demanding server side - CPU power and mostly bandwidth that increase quadratically with each player on the screen. It is still technically very difficult to achieve(not worth the pursue) and why there are so few games actually capable of doing so, and those that do come with some severe sacrifice - being it physics, security like BDO or design, ie EVE Online.
I am not defending Unity or w/e, I am just pointing out that issue with large scale PVP is a problem for any engine and there is no simple solution. There is no engine that will do everything you want, closest is the one you built yourself and even then you will have to make lots of compromises.
At the end, game engine is just a tool and as such it depends how you use it.
There are several simple solutions (like culling, low texture in PvP zones and similar), they are just not good solutions. Good graphics and hundreds of players in the same zone fighting eachother mean you need moster computers to run it and good servers as well.
GW2 do a rather acceptable job nowadays but with culling turned off players with older computers or laptops complain that the FPS turn into a slideshow, I don't have the same problem even when I happen to get in a Zerg Vs Zerg battle (I tend to avoid those though) but I spend rather much on my CPU.
Since massive PvP so often turns into huge zergs anyways I think we need to ask ourselves which MMOs truly need massive combat. I don't think Pantheon is a game like that with it's PvE focus.
Now if you actually makes a MMORPG where formations and tactics matter instead of running in the biggest zerg then you need to spend resources on actually getting good performance during massive PvP but sadly do few if any MMOs a good job there.
So I don't think a game with a rather limited budget (well, not that bad for a crowdfunded game but still limited) should waste so much resources on it. As long as the raids runs flawlessly and you don't get lagg when you walk the cities I think the devs should use the resources to improve the PvE and make the gameworld larger instead.
That is of course my personal opinion but if you want massive PvP you probably should look more towards Camelot Unchained and Crowfall instead. Pantheon will be mainly a PvE game, and I for one look forward to that part. I plan to get my PvP kick elsewhere.
Comments
You get the point....
Why being constructive and address the point one makes when you can rant/bash/sling mud instead...
They threw security out of the window and went for minimal server side checks otherwise such battles would be impossible. "Feature" of Korean games.
The point is, it has nothing to do with rendering that is in fact the simpler pat of the engine. Large PVP battles are demanding server side - CPU power and mostly bandwidth that increase quadratically with each player on the screen. It is still technically very difficult to achieve(not worth the pursue) and why there are so few games actually capable of doing so, and those that do come with some severe sacrifice - being it physics, security like BDO or design, ie EVE Online.
I am not defending Unity or w/e, I am just pointing out that issue with large scale PVP is a problem for any engine and there is no simple solution. There is no engine that will do everything you want, closest is the one you built yourself and even then you will have to make lots of compromises.
At the end, game engine is just a tool and as such it depends how you use it.
Over the years Processing power, Server and Internet tech have improved dramatically. In light of that, why does it seem that large scale pvp has improved so modestly?
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Now, you bump into a player. You send a packet, you get 2 packets back. However, from the server perspective, server is receiving 2 packets, sending out 4.
So far so good?
Imagine there are 20 players in the zone. Server will recieve 20 packets and send 20x20 out, that is 400 packets.
Now, when you make it 100 players in the zone, it suddenly jumps up to 10 000 packets(100x100).
That is just for single update of a single spot in the game. Now, how many updates you need to make per second, how much data you transmit and how many people you have on the server, what is their density, etc?
While this is just a core principle of the issue(likely simplified) and there are many methods how to control it, it still adds up incredibly fast.
Yes, tech advanced but so did games.
However, it is imo more of a design thing, there is simply no demand for such gameplay and due technical difficulties, it still remains beyond reach of "common feature" of an average MMO.
If we tried to render the equivalent of those scenes on Unity:
it would likely melt down.
GW2 do a rather acceptable job nowadays but with culling turned off players with older computers or laptops complain that the FPS turn into a slideshow, I don't have the same problem even when I happen to get in a Zerg Vs Zerg battle (I tend to avoid those though) but I spend rather much on my CPU.
Since massive PvP so often turns into huge zergs anyways I think we need to ask ourselves which MMOs truly need massive combat. I don't think Pantheon is a game like that with it's PvE focus.
Now if you actually makes a MMORPG where formations and tactics matter instead of running in the biggest zerg then you need to spend resources on actually getting good performance during massive PvP but sadly do few if any MMOs a good job there.
So I don't think a game with a rather limited budget (well, not that bad for a crowdfunded game but still limited) should waste so much resources on it. As long as the raids runs flawlessly and you don't get lagg when you walk the cities I think the devs should use the resources to improve the PvE and make the gameworld larger instead.
That is of course my personal opinion but if you want massive PvP you probably should look more towards Camelot Unchained and Crowfall instead. Pantheon will be mainly a PvE game, and I for one look forward to that part. I plan to get my PvP kick elsewhere.