I think GW2 will have a poplation cap for each zone or WvW battlefields. Like in GW1 they will probably divide the persistent areas into districts. The whole distirict system would solve the technical limitations and gives you the freedom to swap between districts at free will.
I see what your saying but don't you think there would be some queue's. Imagine being in one fight say protecting or raiding a lumber yard / supplies and then you think to yourself, 'hey did this bit now, lets switch over', then you change district and start somewhere else. What if there was a queue to get in, if there was a limitation on the area? Like say an alliance battle in the first game where the timer could be going on for ages before joining. I think if it did happen like that it would definately take the fun out of it.
Isn't it shard vs shard vs shard, would they split it up into districts? or could they?
If they district the WvWvW I can tell you right now they are going to draw little interest from mmorpg pvpers.
They won't district WvWvW, maybe the PvE areas, but not WvWvW. It would be a stupid move and completely defeat the whole purpose of that portion of the game. I don't think ANet is that dumb.
I have to agree. A population cap for each server, in WvWvW, is likely but i don't see them splitting it up into districts. Most likely ANet would make the map incredibly large and provide a lot of points of interests (mines, villages, lumber yards, forts, etc) to help lessen the concerntration of players in any given area.
Originally posted by jezvin Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag? O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
I lol'd from the blunt truth of this. Any PvP'er worth his salt knows how to maintain a consistent frame rate one way or another. And considering that Anet maintains one of the best RPG PvP experiences currently online, I'm pretty sure we (the PvP core) won't have to worry about frame dips in combat; if the rest of you suffer from frame dips, PEBKAC.
Originally posted by jezvin Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag? O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
XD, so much sweet, sweet truth in this. I think I just got my first cavity.
Nothing new here but it is always good to forget about all the pointless scaremongering (dungeon DLC) and remind oneself of how awesome this game will be. Like a lot of people, I'm most excited about how the PvP will turn. The World v World one in particular. Could potentially see some Eve Online-esque epic battles & strategic encounters... minus the ridiculous griefing.
More like DAoC type battles, since its World vs World vs World. Got to love 3 faction pvp systems, makes for the best possible pvp out there.
It's been said that the same technology to support 00's of players in PvE is being leveraged to allow 00's of players to pvp in world pvp. World pvp takes place in the "Mists" which is it's own server that connects 3 other competing servers/world shards and according to Eric Flannum quote-unquote: "The population limit is not expected to be reached." According to the wiki:
The battle is on a large scale, where hundreds of people can fight on each side in week-long battles...Players are free to come and go from the battle as they please and there is no limit to the number of players entering.
I'm most surprised by this as there appears to be a lot of confidence (inferred) from these statements that ArenaNet really are intending to put the MMO back into mmorpg. That's not just on the social philosophy but the technology underpinning it. It's a bold claim and I'm very keen to see it in practise not just in theory as it is fundamental to the game.
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
I know your internet hipster comments seem great to you and all, but if you've actually participated in large scale pvp in any mmo you would know just how much of a factor lag is, even if your computer doesn't suffer video lag, it will suffer latency lag because no mmo to date has been able to handle large scale pvp in concentrated areas without latency spikes at best, and massive video lag at worst.
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
*Snort* Ha! You know...there is a REASON necromancers in GW1 can only have 10 or so minions. There is a reason you can only have one of each spirit in an area. Well, other than balancing the game I mean. There use to be a lag spike build that created as many spirits and as many minions as possible that could make people disconnect.
well...even if its not true robert is right.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
*Snort* Ha! You know...there is a REASON necromancers in GW1 can only have 10 or so minions. There is a reason you can only have one of each spirit in an area. Well, other than balancing the game I mean. There use to be a lag spike build that created as many spirits and as many minions as possible that could make people disconnect.
well...even if its not true robert is right.
Everything I say is truthful though. Lying on the internet or not being objective about things is silly and primitive.
What's humorous to me though is that jezvin tried to come in with his hipster post, as if any competitive gamer wouldn't already know that lowering settings for smooth consistent (and higher) fps is always the way to go for clean registration.
Yet he thinks that this knowledge itself fixes the problem to large scale pvp lag, when the problem is much harder to address (no mmo has really done it successfully) than just lowering graphics settings.
It's like someone telling you to wear a helmet to protect your head from a tank shot.
Let's just wait until the beta to see how the lag situation scales. Before release I'd go with the servers being able to handle, adequately (i.e. 200ms lag) if not amazingly (sub 100ms), what the game is designed for. There's no reason to assume otherwise without seeing any evidence either way.
If the lag exceeds 250ms i'd be quite annoyed however as it will seriously impact interrupting in such battles (you can't interrupt <1s skills without a pre-emptive rupt anyway) due to rupt cast times).
It should also be noted that WvWvW does take place over several, linked, battlefields. So 2000 players won't all be always using the same machine, it'll be more likely that the numbers will be around 200 players on each battlefield but there will be no hard population cap. There also wont be one battlefield, but many. Therefore the players will be spread across many servers, and the equipment available will definitely be able to stand up to pressure due to spreading the load intelligently. This is of course assuming one server per map, which is unlikely as there will almost certainly be the ability for servers under little load to help out servers under heavy load by shifting some of the processing across.
Now, a nice beta test would be to get 2000 players crammed into one map in one WvWvW fight to see how it holds up! Who's with me?
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
I know your internet hipster comments seem great to you and all, but if you've actually participated in large scale pvp in any mmo you would know just how much of a factor lag is, even if your computer doesn't suffer video lag, it will suffer latency lag because no mmo to date has been able to handle large scale pvp in concentrated areas without latency spikes at best, and massive video lag at worst.
lol internet hipster cool title
Anyway I have played almost every large scale pvp MMO since DAOC so please blow more crap out your ass
So here we go, I say video lag is not a problem, what do you say?
NOTHING! Awesome next time just be like o yeah your right, instead of a jerk thanks
O wait you said there will be lag.
Way to bring up an argument that no one can answer until we get info about WvW or see it in action here is a cookie stop talking
------------------------------------------------- Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
I know your internet hipster comments seem great to you and all, but if you've actually participated in large scale pvp in any mmo you would know just how much of a factor lag is, even if your computer doesn't suffer video lag, it will suffer latency lag because no mmo to date has been able to handle large scale pvp in concentrated areas without latency spikes at best, and massive video lag at worst.
lol internet hipster cool title
Anyway I have played almost every large scale pvp MMO since DAOC so please blow more crap out your ass
So here we go, I say video lag is not a problem, what do you say?
NOTHING! Awesome next time just be like o yeah your right, instead of a jerk thanks
O wait you said there will be lag.
Way to bring up an argument that no one can answer until we get info about WvW or see it in action here is a cookie stop talking
You can lie about your gaming experience all you want, but those of us that have played all the large scale pvp mmos already know that lag is ALWAYS a factor for big fights.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
You can lie about your gaming experience all you want, but those of us that have played all the large scale pvp mmos already know that lag is ALWAYS a factor for big fights.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
A certain amount of lag is to be expected under certain conditions, so your argument is other games have had lag, and there has been video lag in a perview of the game. ok video lag means nothing for server lag, and then we have other games which just means there will be lag, I have seen games lag with 200 people, I have seen games lag with 10 people. I have been in fights where half my team/guild/group were lagging while the other half wasn't.
You can sit here thinking everyone that likes the game is worshiping it like a god but really you just want to believe they are so you can continue to feel high and mighty. Also EAD for caling me a liar.
------------------------------------------------- Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
I think everyone expects some lag in large scale. It seems by Roberts reasoning any is fail (or at least it coming across like that), my advice would be best not to look for it then as would be setting one self up for disappointment. Obviously not the game to play if you do not like lag in large scale fights because every game has it. Some not as bad as others. We shall have to see how GW2 engine improvements place it high up or near the bottom of the laggy list. To past judgement now without any PvP videos of it, in the designated PVP areas aka 'The Mists' is very subjective.
You can lie about your gaming experience all you want, but those of us that have played all the large scale pvp mmos already know that lag is ALWAYS a factor for big fights.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
A certain amount of lag is to be expected under certain conditions, so your argument is other games have had lag, and there has been video lag in a perview of the game. ok video lag means nothing for server lag, and then we have other games which just means there will be lag, I have seen games lag with 200 people, I have seen games lag with 10 people. I have been in fights where half my team/guild/group were lagging while the other half wasn't.
You can sit here thinking everyone that likes the game is worshiping it like a god but really you just want to believe they are so you can continue to feel high and mighty. Also EAD for caling me a liar.
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
DAoC? Large scale? hardly... WvWvW intends for hundreds of players... and the game can't even handle 50 grouped up in PvE, let alone 100vs100vs100 in pvp.
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
Then its because their network code pretty much sucks - or server for that matter ( ican't tell since I seen the code or know what their server hardware is)
If you own a PS3 and ever played MAG then you'd probaly also tried out 128vs128 players, there's no lag there at all.
Its all about optimization of the code.
If you know how to optimize it then its doable.
and if you dont know what MAG is then I suggest you go here http://www.mag.com
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
Then its because their network code pretty much sucks - or server for that matter ( ican't tell since I seen the code or know what their server hardware is)
If you own a PS3 and ever played MAG then you'd probaly also tried out 128vs128 players, there's no lag there at all.
Its all about optimization of the code.
If you know how to optimize it then its doable.
and if you dont know what MAG is then I suggest you go here http://www.mag.com
Console =! PC. These games lag relative to their era and the hardware used in their era. GW2 can not handle 50 players in PVE mode spamming spells in a concentrated area, large scale pvp will be exponentially worse.
You can't compare consoles to PC because consoles are generally pretty uniform as far as the hardware goes, they develop the games for certain specs that don't vary like PC specs do.
You can lie about your gaming experience all you want, but those of us that have played all the large scale pvp mmos already know that lag is ALWAYS a factor for big fights.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
A certain amount of lag is to be expected under certain conditions, so your argument is other games have had lag, and there has been video lag in a perview of the game. ok video lag means nothing for server lag, and then we have other games which just means there will be lag, I have seen games lag with 200 people, I have seen games lag with 10 people. I have been in fights where half my team/guild/group were lagging while the other half wasn't.
You can sit here thinking everyone that likes the game is worshiping it like a god but really you just want to believe they are so you can continue to feel high and mighty. Also EAD for caling me a liar.
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
DAoC? Large scale? hardly... WvWvW intends for hundreds of players... and the game can't even handle 50 grouped up in PvE, let alone 100vs100vs100 in pvp.
Lol, pay no heed to RobertDinh - if you disagree with him you will be insulted.
Because he is an angry nerd.
He states definitives, such as "GW2 can't handle large scale PvP", as if he is making a solid conclusion yet he clearly states that people shouldn't make conclusions about games that have yet to be released.
Lol, pathetic. The one thing I don't get about you Dinh, is that you make such great points at a glance but your reasoning, claim to experience, and even your credibility at this point is so very flawed.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
Then its because their network code pretty much sucks - or server for that matter ( ican't tell since I seen the code or know what their server hardware is)
If you own a PS3 and ever played MAG then you'd probaly also tried out 128vs128 players, there's no lag there at all.
Its all about optimization of the code.
If you know how to optimize it then its doable.
and if you dont know what MAG is then I suggest you go here http://www.mag.com
Console =! PC. These games lag relative to their era and the hardware used in their era. GW2 can not handle 50 players in PVE mode spamming spells in a concentrated area, large scale pvp will be exponentially worse.
You can't compare consoles to PC because consoles are generally pretty uniform as far as the hardware goes, they develop the games for certain specs that don't vary like PC specs do.
Its all about optimization...
If the code isnt optimized enough, then yes it can't handle it. But optimizing code is a never ending cycle.. you can always optimize your code. Same thing even if its console or PC, so thats pretty irrelevant what type of platform it is on, if the engine is optimized enough.
So if done properly, then yes, its not a problem - also for PC's you get the option to turn down graphical settings which you don't on consoles which for PC's is a way to compromise video lag. So if your computer can't handle that many things on the screen at the same time, then turn down the graphic settings.
Todays PC's are more powerfull than the consoles out on the market, so I can't see any reason why GW2 should't be able to handle 50 players on screen without lag.
You just gotta turn down the graphics setting - plus we don't even know when the game will be out, which also means that there will be plenty of time of engine optimization. And for what I have read ArenaNet say then they take lag as a very serious concern, where as I am not all to worried as I believe then that they are willing to try and optimize the engine as much as far possible to make the game lag as little as possible.
There were several newsbits in the article, at least to me.
He talked about that walking from one end to the other could take you several hours. This is an interesting remark, I'd calculated the world in GW2 to be as long as Kalimdor or Eastern Kingdoms myself.
The leveling he said was 90 min/level. I suspect that the early levels are faster since people I think leveled within the 45 minutes they got to play. So let's say that from level 20 onwards it's 90 min, and from level 1 to 20 it's 1h average. That makes the time to reach max level 110 hours. The average MMORPG ranges the amount of hours to reach max level - at least at launch - between 150 to 250. It's longer than it took in GW, I like their philosophy how they want to remove the grindy stuff that's just put into MMORPG's to prolong their staying subbed.
The World vs World will be one of their most exciting endgame features, I suspect. Avery, they were talking about one side bringing 500 and another 503, so I'm guessing that having 1500+ players wandering around in the Mists not a strange thing. They've already shown that battles with 60+ players involved is an effortless thing to do, as the fight with the Shatterer showed.
Well, leveling will be faster at lower levels, they already said that. But the time it took in the demo isn't really good to measure stuff like that, the demo were made a lot easier (at least the Char part but I think that also go for the noob area) so people should be able to see as much as possible in the short time. That of course affects leveling too.
The mist seems very interesting but I myself prefer smaller battles than ones with 1500 players, that would be too much of a zerg to my taste.
Several hours open world is great at launch, most games today launches way too small, like AoC and WAR. If they eventually patches in Elona and Cantha too (and possible the continent from GW: Utopia) the game will be truly massive after a few years. Comparing a game at launch with games with several expansions is somewhat unfair.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
As usual, this is a lie. Or talking out of your ass, however you want to call it.
Truth is, that we've seen 60-70+ players in action in Shatterer dragon fights with no lag at all, even with everything that was happening onscreen.
The only moment that lag was noticed was when 100+ players were standing in an area of 10-20m and they started spamming spells all at the same time.
It's interesting though that you have to use deliberate lies and distortions of the truth to find bad things to say about GW2. It just means how good GW2 is, if someone like you can't find better material to discredit GW2.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
The mist seems very interesting but I myself prefer smaller battles than ones with 1500 players, that would be too much of a zerg to my taste.
They were talking about so many people being there in the Mists as an example. But from what I read, the Mists will be at least 5-6 areas large, so those players will be spread out over the Mist areas.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Comments
Good interview! Thanks for sharing!
He who keeps his cool best wins.
If they district the WvWvW I can tell you right now they are going to draw little interest from mmorpg pvpers.
They won't district WvWvW, maybe the PvE areas, but not WvWvW. It would be a stupid move and completely defeat the whole purpose of that portion of the game. I don't think ANet is that dumb.
I have to agree. A population cap for each server, in WvWvW, is likely but i don't see them splitting it up into districts. Most likely ANet would make the map incredibly large and provide a lot of points of interests (mines, villages, lumber yards, forts, etc) to help lessen the concerntration of players in any given area.
Video lag in large scale PvP? omg I have to lower the graphics so I don't get lag?
O wait I remeber I'm a pvper I already did that no lag gg.
-------------------------------------------------
Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
EKSA
-------------------------------------------------
I lol'd from the blunt truth of this. Any PvP'er worth his salt knows how to maintain a consistent frame rate one way or another. And considering that Anet maintains one of the best RPG PvP experiences currently online, I'm pretty sure we (the PvP core) won't have to worry about frame dips in combat; if the rest of you suffer from frame dips, PEBKAC.
BOOYAKA!
More like DAoC type battles, since its World vs World vs World. Got to love 3 faction pvp systems, makes for the best possible pvp out there.
Gamer-4-Life
It's been said that the same technology to support 00's of players in PvE is being leveraged to allow 00's of players to pvp in world pvp. World pvp takes place in the "Mists" which is it's own server that connects 3 other competing servers/world shards and according to Eric Flannum quote-unquote: "The population limit is not expected to be reached." According to the wiki:
I'm most surprised by this as there appears to be a lot of confidence (inferred) from these statements that ArenaNet really are intending to put the MMO back into mmorpg. That's not just on the social philosophy but the technology underpinning it. It's a bold claim and I'm very keen to see it in practise not just in theory as it is fundamental to the game.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
I know your internet hipster comments seem great to you and all, but if you've actually participated in large scale pvp in any mmo you would know just how much of a factor lag is, even if your computer doesn't suffer video lag, it will suffer latency lag because no mmo to date has been able to handle large scale pvp in concentrated areas without latency spikes at best, and massive video lag at worst.
*Snort* Ha! You know...there is a REASON necromancers in GW1 can only have 10 or so minions. There is a reason you can only have one of each spirit in an area. Well, other than balancing the game I mean. There use to be a lag spike build that created as many spirits and as many minions as possible that could make people disconnect.
well...even if its not true robert is right.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
Everything I say is truthful though. Lying on the internet or not being objective about things is silly and primitive.
What's humorous to me though is that jezvin tried to come in with his hipster post, as if any competitive gamer wouldn't already know that lowering settings for smooth consistent (and higher) fps is always the way to go for clean registration.
Yet he thinks that this knowledge itself fixes the problem to large scale pvp lag, when the problem is much harder to address (no mmo has really done it successfully) than just lowering graphics settings.
It's like someone telling you to wear a helmet to protect your head from a tank shot.
Let's just wait until the beta to see how the lag situation scales. Before release I'd go with the servers being able to handle, adequately (i.e. 200ms lag) if not amazingly (sub 100ms), what the game is designed for. There's no reason to assume otherwise without seeing any evidence either way.
If the lag exceeds 250ms i'd be quite annoyed however as it will seriously impact interrupting in such battles (you can't interrupt <1s skills without a pre-emptive rupt anyway) due to rupt cast times).
It should also be noted that WvWvW does take place over several, linked, battlefields. So 2000 players won't all be always using the same machine, it'll be more likely that the numbers will be around 200 players on each battlefield but there will be no hard population cap. There also wont be one battlefield, but many. Therefore the players will be spread across many servers, and the equipment available will definitely be able to stand up to pressure due to spreading the load intelligently. This is of course assuming one server per map, which is unlikely as there will almost certainly be the ability for servers under little load to help out servers under heavy load by shifting some of the processing across.
Now, a nice beta test would be to get 2000 players crammed into one map in one WvWvW fight to see how it holds up! Who's with me?
lol internet hipster cool title
Anyway I have played almost every large scale pvp MMO since DAOC so please blow more crap out your ass
So here we go, I say video lag is not a problem, what do you say?
NOTHING! Awesome next time just be like o yeah your right, instead of a jerk thanks
O wait you said there will be lag.
Way to bring up an argument that no one can answer until we get info about WvW or see it in action here is a cookie stop talking
-------------------------------------------------
Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
EKSA
-------------------------------------------------
You can lie about your gaming experience all you want, but those of us that have played all the large scale pvp mmos already know that lag is ALWAYS a factor for big fights.
You can sit there deluding yourself that everything in gw2 will work perfectly, but we've already seen in PvE massive video lag with just about 50 people spamming spells, let alone 100vs100 pvp.
Here are some chars to convince you.
http://myplanetside.station.sony.com/character.jsp?charId=1185981&worldId=15
http://guilds.camelotherald.com/characters/chardisplay.php?server=Ector&c=304510
Had older chars also this is just classic
http://guilds.camelotherald.com/characters/chardisplay.php?server=Galahad&c=710308
olderish char, on my orignial server at least
http://www.teamwmd.com/home/?cat=3
First Seatower cap on NA1, ty
I think this was my war char I quit in early november after release.
https://realmwar.warhammeronline.com/realmwar/CharacterInfo.war?id=4698&server=131
Lol my wow time Tarren mill fights anyone?
http://www.warcraftrealms.com/charsheet/654407
A certain amount of lag is to be expected under certain conditions, so your argument is other games have had lag, and there has been video lag in a perview of the game. ok video lag means nothing for server lag, and then we have other games which just means there will be lag, I have seen games lag with 200 people, I have seen games lag with 10 people. I have been in fights where half my team/guild/group were lagging while the other half wasn't.
You can sit here thinking everyone that likes the game is worshiping it like a god but really you just want to believe they are so you can continue to feel high and mighty. Also EAD for caling me a liar.
-------------------------------------------------
Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
EKSA
-------------------------------------------------
I think everyone expects some lag in large scale. It seems by Roberts reasoning any is fail (or at least it coming across like that), my advice would be best not to look for it then as would be setting one self up for disappointment. Obviously not the game to play if you do not like lag in large scale fights because every game has it. Some not as bad as others. We shall have to see how GW2 engine improvements place it high up or near the bottom of the laggy list. To past judgement now without any PvP videos of it, in the designated PVP areas aka 'The Mists' is very subjective.
As I expected your experience is minimal and not comparable to top competitive play. You don't understand massive pvp battles because you partake in small scale pvp and think it is massive. Tarren mill? Great for it's time, but try wintergrasp, where you have 120vs120 and it lags like crazy.
DAoC? Large scale? hardly... WvWvW intends for hundreds of players... and the game can't even handle 50 grouped up in PvE, let alone 100vs100vs100 in pvp.
Then its because their network code pretty much sucks - or server for that matter ( ican't tell since I seen the code or know what their server hardware is)
If you own a PS3 and ever played MAG then you'd probaly also tried out 128vs128 players, there's no lag there at all.
Its all about optimization of the code.
If you know how to optimize it then its doable.
and if you dont know what MAG is then I suggest you go here http://www.mag.com
Console =! PC. These games lag relative to their era and the hardware used in their era. GW2 can not handle 50 players in PVE mode spamming spells in a concentrated area, large scale pvp will be exponentially worse.
You can't compare consoles to PC because consoles are generally pretty uniform as far as the hardware goes, they develop the games for certain specs that don't vary like PC specs do.
Lol, pay no heed to RobertDinh - if you disagree with him you will be insulted.
Because he is an angry nerd.
He states definitives, such as "GW2 can't handle large scale PvP", as if he is making a solid conclusion yet he clearly states that people shouldn't make conclusions about games that have yet to be released.
Lol, pathetic. The one thing I don't get about you Dinh, is that you make such great points at a glance but your reasoning, claim to experience, and even your credibility at this point is so very flawed.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Its all about optimization...
If the code isnt optimized enough, then yes it can't handle it. But optimizing code is a never ending cycle.. you can always optimize your code. Same thing even if its console or PC, so thats pretty irrelevant what type of platform it is on, if the engine is optimized enough.
So if done properly, then yes, its not a problem - also for PC's you get the option to turn down graphical settings which you don't on consoles which for PC's is a way to compromise video lag. So if your computer can't handle that many things on the screen at the same time, then turn down the graphic settings.
Todays PC's are more powerfull than the consoles out on the market, so I can't see any reason why GW2 should't be able to handle 50 players on screen without lag.
You just gotta turn down the graphics setting - plus we don't even know when the game will be out, which also means that there will be plenty of time of engine optimization. And for what I have read ArenaNet say then they take lag as a very serious concern, where as I am not all to worried as I believe then that they are willing to try and optimize the engine as much as far possible to make the game lag as little as possible.
Well, leveling will be faster at lower levels, they already said that. But the time it took in the demo isn't really good to measure stuff like that, the demo were made a lot easier (at least the Char part but I think that also go for the noob area) so people should be able to see as much as possible in the short time. That of course affects leveling too.
The mist seems very interesting but I myself prefer smaller battles than ones with 1500 players, that would be too much of a zerg to my taste.
Several hours open world is great at launch, most games today launches way too small, like AoC and WAR. If they eventually patches in Elona and Cantha too (and possible the continent from GW: Utopia) the game will be truly massive after a few years. Comparing a game at launch with games with several expansions is somewhat unfair.
As usual, this is a lie. Or talking out of your ass, however you want to call it.
Truth is, that we've seen 60-70+ players in action in Shatterer dragon fights with no lag at all, even with everything that was happening onscreen.
The only moment that lag was noticed was when 100+ players were standing in an area of 10-20m and they started spamming spells all at the same time.
It's interesting though that you have to use deliberate lies and distortions of the truth to find bad things to say about GW2. It just means how good GW2 is, if someone like you can't find better material to discredit GW2.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
They were talking about so many people being there in the Mists as an example. But from what I read, the Mists will be at least 5-6 areas large, so those players will be spread out over the Mist areas.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."