Server meshing only truly works when the player does not even notice they have passed from one server to another, and they can do their mission without interruption by a server playing catch up with their data.
No, quadruple the size of the sandbox, panic - because you ran out of sand, shit in the sandbox, smooth out the sand in a .2 patch, promise smoother sand in the immediate future but schedule it in 5 years time, get marketing to sell everyone a few broken toys.
@@RicoZaid_ - They don't need money. $700mil is enough to make this game 10 times over. What they need are studio leads that aren't going to be 'sushi friends' with the employees and actually make them do work. Chris has allowed CIG to become lazy.
I mean, it's a react video. Far better than creators who only nod and make non commital sounds until the video ends, says 1 thing and ends their react video. If you aren't here for his commentary then just go watch the 16 minute video instead
Appreciate you letting us know that part of the beginning of Chris’ presentation on Server Meshing was “coming soon”. That’s an important bit that wasn’t very cinematic for the video, but important for those of us who weren’t around during this time and shows why so many people mistrust what Chris says
Ive been following the game since I was 11 can you imagine an 11yr old waiting for a game. 9years later and now the 20yr old is still waiting. And it's especially sad since there are a LOT of people who have passed or will pass before the PU reaches 1.0 or Squadron releases.
1000 ppl per server. 1000 on Hurston, 1000 more in orbit around Hurston. 1000 more at New Babbage. 1000 at the Pyro jump point. Each place on its own server. With server meshing and seamless transitions it won’t feel empty at all.
@@AnyOther-Nameyes it is possible. They can decide to split the map up into however many sections they want in static meshing, just not be able to dynamically spin up new servers and divide the map while the game is running.
@@AnyOther-NameYeah, they already did this in previous tests, technically server meshing can be bound to any OCS, so even a server to a single ship if they wanted.
@@AnyOther-Name that’s the next step if the devs are to be believed. But for now, as far as I’m aware, 4.0 will just be one server per system with the handoff happening in the wormhole
My favorite narrative in the game right now is the mission that takes you to the Covalex space station that blew up. Loved the story telling and discovery while EVA'ing in zero-G to try and figure out what happened there. Felt like a real mystery.
i think a big part should be group missions .. today most "missons" are build for singleplayers .. what we need are missions that only become available or viable if you have a minimum of players participating .. (like dungeons in other MMOs you simply are not able to do them) ... also we need something like "mission hubs" .. like a bar or an office where people can gather as a starting point .. so groups can form for all the people who still are more or less playing solo .. oh .. and we finally need proper ORG / spectrum integration into the game ^^
Bruh, when is the hype ever not too much? Yeah, CIG def has their role in it. But it's mostly content creators like SuperMac and Bored Gamer who are always posting videos like, "This changes everything!", "Unbelievable Changes Coming!" and my personal favorite, "The Hype is Real!!!". In the quest for likes, subs and shares, every update and every patch gets blown way out of proportion.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but server meshing will cause Stanton for instance to have many servers for different sections of it. So right now we have 1 server 1 system and it has issues because it can't handle the load. Break STanton and Pyro into 6 servers all shared by 1 set of players and you have much smaller spaces for a "server" to do it's calculations therefore better experience. Have I misunderstood this?
correct. but what if all players are in the same landing zone, which is hosted by one of the 6 servers? Then you would have gained nothing. this is why dynamic server meshing comes into play, which would be able to dynamically split the landing zone into not one, but several servers on demand in order to counteract the high load due to the number of players. this is the ultimate goal of cig
That`s the correct idea apparently. BUT Keep in mind that we won`t have 100 players - 1 server, it would be 1000 players - 1 server, so whatever performance you gain, you now lose because 10x more players in that section/segment. Also worth to mention, this doesn`t actually work properly when you consider that stations are limited with the number of hangars available to land. The missions are also shared between players, so actually getting a bunker mission might be a question of who clicks faster on the pop-up. And in order to fix all of these, they need the "Dynamic Server Meshing" which will transfer players seamless between servers on demand so you`ll always have a place to land or a mission to do. And this tech is really further away, in theory is fine but in practice it might not even work.
they will need to get towing missions in the game to pay players to tow ships out of parking areas for cash, or probably just actually switch on insurance costs will fix that as players will be reluctant to abandon ships when it costs money to claim a new one
The game wont stop feeling empty until they start putting out npcs coming/going from stations/starports/using elevators Whats funny though is that if they dont let the starfarer do internal fuel xfer, no one is going to be straying far afield in pyro. everyone will just hop from station to station.
One big problem that I'm seeing after the replication layer was separated is the amount of abandoned ships that currently persist after a server recovery. They need to figure out how to clear out the abandoned ships its ridiculous with the current server player cap.
One thing that's working well is local inventory at the little Outpost. I was doing the small package deliveries and with loot the containers inside the places. I would put them in the local inventory and forget to transfer them to my ship. Logged on the next day to do more deliveries and the stuff in the local inventory was still there
You know what will make Chris and CIG more truthful to the players? Stop buying the ships. It may sound counter productive given they need $$$ but I'm very sure they have sufficient funds to get to where they promise the players...
I was always worried about how they would fill 100 star systems if this game ever completed but I just did the math and realized, if they can get 2,000 people in one shard it means every system can have 200 people on it wich is double our current player count , wich doesn't sound that bad, I honestly thought they'd have to come up with SHARD meshing next but 2k per shard seems pretty ok for 100 star systems
You said it at the end of the video. The key point I think everybody is missing. 4.0 brings a NEW STAR SYSTEM and the mechanics it takes to make server meshing work properly. It proves it is possible. Once they get meshing to work and a new system comes online, the framework is there, and then it's just a simple matter of bringing new content in.
I really wonder about the performance after server meshing. What's the reason to assume a significant increase in performance? If they use 10 meshed servers to handle 1000 players per system, wouldn't each server on average have the same load as one server handling one system? How does the expected performance increase happen?
What I find funny is how the hype keeps moving. First it was 3.23, as soon as that was released we immediately moved on to "Oh WOW 4.0 will be game changing".
Every major patch cycle bringing huge upgrades is a good thing isn't it? Compared to random 3.10 patch notes I looked up and one of the highest features on the notes is "added visor wiping mechanic". Over the years the patches have often been kinda anemic. Every upcoming patch being a game changer is overdue.
Server meshing is a technical nightmare. Imo it’d take a company like Epic Games to execute it correctly. And games should be designed from the ground up for it… retro fitting is a wild endeavor.literally Everything has to change in some way
I would agree 100% right up until 1 year ago where I started to see development really coming along and honestly now I believe they can do it given enough time, as crazy as that would have sounded to me 10 yrs ago
Unless your playing in a group, or team, or org the only time you might see another player is either when you are leaving the Hab, taking a tram or calling your ship, as other players are doing likewise at other terminals. I have rarely seen actual players stop, and converse, and just be sociable. Everyone is on a rush to do their next thing.
i played the other day and i had a corsair with a player flying down to me. i find myself getting close to people a lot of times. but you can go a long time between getting to another player. but even if we get server meshing and we can meat eny person on the same continent. the universe will be getting bigger so it will probably be hours between contact unless you are in high populated areas.
10:40 ….. iCache they’ll be able to start making the game, star engine…. Container streaming…. Ship pipeline…. Server meshing now. Hinge after hinge after hinge. It’s very much looking ponzi or social security scheme as we are in year TWELVE
a game like this isnt made overnight, they are taking their time and not rushing it like other studios would. noone knows how long a game like this would take to make since its not been done before
No, This is because you are seeing how the sausage is made. How long has GVS 6 been in development? Answer: 7 Years. How much has RockStar said it will cost? 2 BILLION dollars. Remember RockStar has over 2000 employees. If you saw how many iterations and changes and reverses and redesigns GTA 6 has went through in the last 7 years, would you call it a ponzi? As Mike has said, the only issue with how CIG is making the game is the funding and this semi-live service BS. CIG is making the game and sometimes ideas do not work out at the scale with which they want. this means re-work and new idea.
The only odd thing about CIG is the funding model. In any other universe they would have gotten private funding, and the project would have gone under around 2018. Or they would have just released the jankier original S42 that was halfway done. Many games have had issues like CIG has faced in terms of bad outsourcing, or major engine upgrade requirements for the vision, or scope creep. The crowdfunding means they are unique in these problems screw the consumer over directly instead of investors like CR has done in the past. It also means we can just keep funding them as they reorganize and figure out their pipelines to actually make the game. Its such a double edged sword.
I'd be happy if they just gave Stanton 2 or 3 servers; 1 server for each 2 planet system, and a 3rd for quantum and miscellaneous space. Doesn't address the problem of having the increased player count all go to one location and slow it down again, but it would still be a big improvement.
How is the Zeus a Connie killer? It has less shields, less guns, less cargo and less hull HP. The main lesson I took from the Zeus is that the Connie needs it's turrets reworked into size 3 remote turrets.
I'm actually most curious to see what comes in 4.1, that in my mind will help us see the real vision and pace for the game in the near future. Everything up to 4.0 is mostly tech and things we've known about for some time. Not to say it's bad, I think it's great and I'm looking forward to jumping in once 4.0 drops.
I feel like 3.23 was supposed to be the biggest update yet. Then it was released and IMMEDIATELY 4.0 became the biggest update yet. It actually confused and disappointed me. You can say that 3.23 *was* the biggest until 4.0 comes out. That's all well and good but 3.23 came out and the hype was a let down to me. And before I can react they already talk about 4.0 to smoke and mirrors the 'meh' that 3.23 was.
i think they need to focus on planet fauna diversity, most planets are just one single biome, having a planet that resembles earth would be so interesting to explore, deserts, rainforests, frozen mountains, volcanoes, massive forests etc, pyro seems that the only new thing they did to some planets is just different world gen
Shouldn't hard death kind scale with ship/weapon size? For example if a smaller ship gets its shields knocked down by like a S5 I'd expect it to pop like a cherry vs two small ships dueling I could see a soft death depending on circumstance.
Server meshing will only work if they also streamline the data flow between the user's game client and the server. Spreading out people will definitely help, but if you still have unnecessary amounts of client to server "chatter" for every little door that opens, it will quickly turn into a slideshow. You get a centralized event, like Invictus, with 1000+ people, you will be lucky to get 3fps. Not saying that server meshing shouldn't greatly improve performance, but there are other areas as well that will need addressing, hopefully sooner than later.
@@morganlefay-k4c I have, it worked great with 2 people. That isn't my point. Each person could have their own server, but if you flood the network with too much data flow, it will still run like crap. Server meshing will take the strain off of the servers that the game is running on, allowing them to run much smoother. It will not magically reduce the data flowing back and forth from those servers to your game client. Try running a modern MMO, run on modern servers, on a high performance PC, over a phone line, and tell me how great it runs!
In the industry: Pre-Alpha is fleshing out the features and concept. Alpha is establishing and finishing all foundational features. Beta means you've already established your features, and you're now implementing all your content. Leaving Beta means you're content complete, and the rest of the pipeline is bug smashing, optimization, etc. If you think anything that isn't this, you're objectively wrong.
I think 4.0 could be on the same level as 3.18 when it goes live with lots of crashes, bugs and slow AI and it will take several month to stabilize the systems which will ultimately delay dynamic server meshing by probably 6 month+. While each new ship, each new mechanic and backend improvement added to the game will bring us closer to the promised land, I don't expect to see the game going beta within the next 6-7 years due to the amount of tech-debt and still plenty of promised game loops not even being available in a first implementation. And from more polished loops we unfortunately know that these might take 2-3 years to get there. As such, while I do appreciate any addition made to the game, I don't feel hyped yet. But I'm pretty sure they will do their best (at least their marketing and PR teams) to bombard us with little information and leaks right before CitizenCon and the anniversary event to get players back on board again and lure some more $$$ ouf of us.
Beta is usually almost complete in all aspects except bugs. But, it's always dependant on the devs usage because there isn't an actual industry standard.
It would be neat that the farthest planet in pyro can only be accessed by large ships with large quantum drives. It would incentivise carriers and other gameplay
SC as MMO relies on how many concurrent players we can have : 1000 people interacting with each other is still a standard number for video games ... not sure what the hype is about ... I really hope they go above that ... the more interesting goal would be tens of thousand interacting with each others. Also having limited shards will get people to switch when they feel it is too busy or too quiet which is not ideal ... switching server/shards is bad
the previous server meshing test was 500 players per server witch is too much for the server, but lets say 100 ppls per server each planet devided in 10 servers so around 4000 players per systems, it wont feel empty
It probably will even feel quite crowded, suddenly. Just imagine only 5% of those 4000 decide to do salvage missions at Yela, CIG would have to put up traffic lights at the OMs...
I guess, 3.23(.X) and 4.0 is both sort of the biggest patch in their own way: 3.23 is biggest patch gameplay wise and 4.0 is the biggest patch in the backend tech wise. When I am CIG, I would hold back gameplay stuff back when launching SM, so you can isolate bugs better related to SM. When you mixing gameplay and backend tech together, you will have tons of bugs all at once, and you don't know the cause is from a gameplay side or server meshing side.
One minute into the space tomato video. Six minutes into the salte Mike video. Mike already determined he doesn't agree with how the video is framed. Edit(tomato hasn't said anything yet either.)
There are a few things that need to be improved in the replication layer in my opinion. I'm not a huge fan of killing a bounty and just preparing to loot the cargo when I get a 5-minute error and come back to the ship I was getting ready to loot being gone. It's not immersive, it's not fun, and it feels bad. Otherwise it is usually a good thing of course.
I would be happy with 300 players or 400. They should focus on that with 4.0 and then when server meshing works with 400, slowly start to scale it up with playtests. But first get us a working 4.0 with some iteration of working server meshing...
With all these extra players in servwr meshing, how will that work etc. there will be a ton of ships outside a mining outpost trying to use the screens etc. well thats what i think
Server Meshing is very misleading in general, I`ve noticed since 3.23 came out that A LOT of problems that SC have, won`t be fixed with server meshing, AI is one of them, but to not make it TLDR, when the Server "Recovers" it`s very laggy and very buggy for a few minutes until all clients shows up, on our Group/Party, I was the second player to get recovered, when I finally Pop-In, I lost the mission that I had, and the NPC Turrets destroyed my ship because I was tresspasing. Another time that happened was mid gun-fight, I died and woke up in prison, while doing a regular PVE Bounty, has a lawful citizen... Another time this happened to me, all my ammo and guns stopped working, they simply refuse to shoot, the fix was to drop them on the ground and re-equip them. Another time this happened all my Stims didn`t work, I use them, but my health never recovered, all 4 of them bugged out, dropping and picking back up didn`t work, I had to get new ones. Another this happened I somehow fell through the station in Port Tressler, luckily all my Items just went back to the station inventory. Food that you buy sometimes does not fill your hunger/thirst meter, after a server recovery. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This only happens after a server recovers, and still taking too long to do so, last time I waited around 10 minutes, I know was more than 8 and less than 10 in total time, but still, sitting and waiting for a "server recover" is BS, 2-3 minutes is fine, but 10 minutes is absurdly long. Servers keep crashing over and over, the "replication layer" is just smoke and mirrors, intra-server functionality doesn`t exist at all yet, overall we are sitting at 5 fps average for the server performance, AI shooting through the walls, and I can still get stuck into a wall if I do the melee takedown animation on an NPC, or I can`t refuel/repair/re-arm my ships at a station. I`ve also experience 2x the 30K error, meaning the server recovery functionality doesn`t actually work for all servers, might be a good amount of servers, but not all of them. I fully agree with Mike, we need to see this working properly, 3.23 while "better" is far from the "ideal" performance they pitched at us for over a decade now. This may not seem to be much of a problem, but we absolutely experience more Bugs in SC than we experience Fun in SC.
Thing is the game and by proxy sq42 doesn't have physics. Outside of ragdoll physics which was new at the time cry engine which the game is built on has no physics and no object collision so every entity needs seperate smoke and mirror "physics" added to it and collision with every possible object in the verse ....all cry engine games have terrible collision issues ....then they want to damage ships like a voxl environment? Ha.....what there version of localized server meshing will do is cause more and more desync. They have no time dilation to accommodate the disparity in latency between the servers and the replication layer let alone server to server or server to player. It's not that their idea of server meshing is new or that its just "hard to do" it hasn't been done that way because it's foolish and requires waaaay more coding.
With a 1000 or more players it won’t feel empty. But it will still feel lifeless. The environment will still feel like a stage design, not a living, breathing universe. That is my biggest concern, beyond getting the game to a playable state.
I'm so hesitant to be excited about SC these days I'm really just waiting for squadron, rather than watch the pot boil and the paint dry. I think they'll figure this out tho
Your different perspectives are because the majority of the game right now is sitting around with your friends speculating on what gameplay will be like when X thing happens, and how they'll do it, or how they *should* do it. Honestly one of the big revelations for most players is finding out CIG doesn't even know how they're going to do it still. I imagine their board meetings are speculating as much as the playerbase does.
I'm gonna be happy with 4.0 even if they only put in server meshing, increase stability and server performance with it (most importantly AI behavior being less janky), and give us Pyro with new cool locations to check out, as well as some of that kill quest spam, but in a new type of a location. I'll be fine with that as a huge step in the right direction. I'd consider paying 50€ for it (and for the latest few patches I have skipped for around a year), and then wait for the actual content and systems to be added before I think about funding the development more. That's my personal relationship with star citizen. I only give them money, when I feel they have given me entertainment worth that money, compared to what the competition would give for the same money. In that entertainment, I count their development update videos too. So, if they have given me hours of enjoyable video content. A hundred hours worth of fun messing around in the PU with friends. I will pledge like an additional 50€ in the next ship sale. If they don't deliver patches I like with features that excite me. If there are no ships delivered that me and my friends would be hyped over. I just won't pledge. I just won't log in to the PU. No reason for me to get angry at Chris, CIG or Star Citizen. Even if they closed shop right now, pulled the plug. I wouldn't feel scammed. I'd be sad but not feel cheated. Because I engaged with the project by only giving them money for things I felt they already gave me something in exchange for. So if 4.0 is another tech patch that's very unfinished, unstable, broken, and unenjoyable. I won't feel bad just closing the game and deciding to check back in at next patch. Maybe next year. Maybe two years from now.
yes we do need something else if you experience a server reconnect it should keep your contracts that's one thing that's annoying especially when starting fresh and doing package missions I had one happen just before I could quantum jump to an OM above micro as I was going round the planet to go to the final location to deliver the last three packages in a 10 package mission (the ones where you pick em up at a station just outside the grounds of the distribution centre) when I reconnected the packages were still there but all markers, the mission and my 15k payout was gone and since outside those missions the packages are worthless I just tractor beamed them out of my titan and took off for tressler instead I'd given up! I've already said this and i'll say it again until the servers are more stable and meshing is down they should implement pay per package so if you delivered seven out of 10 your at least payed for those and sure in the context of real life that wouldn't happen a strawman argument i've been given many times but also in the context of life your contract and your deliveries wouldn't magically disappear due to a glitch in the matrix this is a game and players just give up on deliveries all together if they keep losing money trying to do them and never getting a payout only the small missions are viable right now because it's shorter playtime it's less risk but it's also a smaller payout! So I think in the context of this is a game and is that fun the answer is no, it's not fun to do a mission and have it wiped halfway through, they fix this one thing and make missions persistent heck maybe even let you back out to main menu and the missions still there when you come back in i'll be happy cause it seems the only 2 goals besides fun in this game is money and reputation and boy does it hurt your rep with a company if you fail a mission repeatedly!
My biggest worry for SC is that once they have actually made the game... where is this new market of players? Millions have bought the game and put it down, probably a lot of them for good. A lot will come back, but they already bought the game... so how is CIG gonna cash out on 1.0 to keep this absolute monster of a server heavy game running? Scary prospect man
Yup...market cap for space games is usually around 2-3 million players max.....ED did do 20 mil but they were on Consol opening up a large market and the plandemic definitely helped the sales like it did everyone else
Remember, though, that through backers CIG has been able to develop its own custom game engine; scale the company; develop assets; develop methods of working. All that can be applied to the creation of multiple games over years - games that have nothing to do with Star Citizen, Squadron 42 or even space. All those other games can generate income. In fact, having been permitted only to back CIG for SC/SQ42 rather than being able to be a true investor leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Backing SC/SQ42 gets you those games as a reality (all being well), but that's it. The real money for CIG comes from further exploiting all the core technology and systems that can be used far wider than SC/SQ42 but have been paid for by SCSQ42.
lmfao, the Pyro Station felt more alive than the landing zones ffs! Bring back Levski! Levs felt more alive than practically all the landing zones.. the OLD ArcCorp and GrimHex felt more alive than any of the landing zones and stations do right now. I want my levski back = 3=
I don't think a patch can ever be as bad as 3.18. The deployment was broken on a fundamental level and, *ahem* teams were """restructured""" as a result. It can't happen again. They won't allow for it.
@3:20 ... but the space is empty, it deepens the immersion .... when you would be in space, the feeling that you are alone, far from any other people ... is just correct. Space is vast thus must induce the lonelyness feeling, and it's correct. With those base assumptions: 1 times the population 2 times the space it will be terrible. Players will be forced to interact with other players and NPCs. With another thing in mind: "crime against other players is valid gameplay" it will be terrible, like a self-hostile anthill. 5 times the congestion will be annying. mark my words. @17:20 size of the system itself is not that important. If the bodies (planets/moons) are more and less the same, with bigger the system it only takes more time to travel from A to B. In a bigger (wider) system you would spent more time in-travel, but it's the bodies that matter. The bigger - the less player-player interaction, the smaller the bodies are, the chance to spot another player or NPCs increases. @19:15 - I totally agree, the bigger the patch, the more changes the bigger the chance that compatibility will fail. It's also more difficult to track problems with more things changed. Smaller patches don't look (and sell) as spectacular, but are easier to manage. about Zeus - I totally agree, size kinda doesn't matter, it matters which ships it will replace as a daily driver; @47:13 - "do not deliver another 3.23" - was it that bad for you? Imo it was 1) not as packed with features as advertised 2) very smooth and not very buggy, with a lot of new features, imo - very nice to play and enjoy!
@@mayoluck this goal my be impossible to achieve, because in this case you would need multiple people @spaceports only, that means you need many ppl who will never or rarely leave a spaceport. You can't limit players how much time they can spend in space vs at a station. Only way to achieve this is NPCs. I assume that no matter how many ppl will be online at a time, they will spread out in space. of course, if ppl join in groups, they will play in their groups. But this doesn't change the feel @spaceports and/or cities.
the dream was there, they thougt it was possible, it is, but until it could be realised, there where still YEARS to fight through. now they are just that thad bit short of climbing over the ridge of the worst to get behind oneself to... be at the shore of the sea to start the game they wanted to build (we built up from the planets core, don't forget that) if they make it, it's up to them to swim AND to fly later on. i wish them best luck, and keep my support.
i happy the Polaris is coming but more and more i'm terrified don't know would the Polaris i ccu in to be the ship they know how it should work, the best i can do is wait and not apply the ccu until it has been reviewed and feel satisfy enough, but man the waste of time make the ccu chain and waiting are can't be refund
alpha is building the tech and content, beta is for ironing out bugs with the tech, traditionally. These days early access has blurred the lines so much, those labels almost have no meaning as applied to game development. Which i don't think it's a bad thing, delivering content earlier is a good thing, makes better games. I look forward to AI testing making this whole process way more smooth though.
It doesn't 'just' need server meshing at all. It needs a minimal optimisation pass to make the game somewhat stable when it comes to the gameplay in the current build. It also needs a massive influx of players on F2P accounts to make this game actually successful. CIG needs to change their business model as this game is taking FAR too long to even put features into the game.
The problem with 4.0 is NOT what it contains, but with WHAT accompanies 4.0, namely: PYRO. This new System is NOT a patch, its an EXPANSION, and like EVERY expansion to any game, will come with it's own problems that will (unfortunately) overshadow 4.0
Nice to see the myth of the floodgate of content alive and well .. as if there are lots of missions stacked up behind next-tech 2.0 .. still exists. One more horizon to go.
I still haven't seen a proper desgin explanation about how the game will handle hundreds of people in a single place. When an event happens in Orison, and the entire population wants to land there, what is the expected behavior? Not really asking about the tech details but about the concept.
Not being fully versed in all of the tech, but having watched a lot of videos on Server Meshing, from my understanding each area will have a dedicated server. For example, let’s say you have an area that has, for example, 3 large ships each with 7 people on them, 5 more small ships with 1-2 people, and a building with another 20 people inside. Each of the large ships will have their interior be its own small server. The small ships outside the building will be in a separate server that the large ships interact with. The building’s interior may be one or multiple servers depending on the size. And all of these can see & interact with each other. That’s how dynamic server meshing is supposed to work.
@@MorphicGalaxy Thanks but my question is not really about the technical details of the mesh. What I still haven't heard is how a "single" universe (composite of multiple servers or not, this is not my doubt) can work in moments where thousands of people want to be at the same location. I don't think it is possible in any way to have a single universe because locations are not designed at that kind of scale. Instantiation is unavoidable because of this problem, regardless of the server structure but I have never seen CIG tackling this matter when they explain server meshing. Yes, we will get larger instances, but there is no way everybody is playing in the same universe at the same time.
@@Garris_Shrike Ah, you’re talking about hundreds of people logging into, say, a single spaceport, and therefore there not being enough physical space to hold everyone. Yeah, as for that issue, I believe that they have mentioned that there will be instanced servers based on… I think they mentioned region-based instancing, back at their Citizen Con discussion on it? I believe that the term was instanced “shards”, and normally each of those are instanced so that there’s some way to prevent the issues you noted. Don’t quote me on that of course, this is from memory of a while ago, but that is an issue that definitely hasn’t been touched upon as much as it probably should be.
@@Garris_Shrike Most definitely yeah, though I believe that the goal is to eventually have enough area to host all players in a single universe… Though whether that’s feasible is a whole other matter.
Of course its hype and its big hype, new star system effectively doubling our play space if not more on top of all the other changes. I've been backing and playing star citizen for what 9 years now? If I've learned anything its to be excited for the new good good when it comes but to fully expect that good good to need another 3-4 months to function the way its supposed to. So be excited, but temper your expectations for how its actually going to feel, it will get to where it needs to be eventually but star citizen has been an lesson in patience for just about everyone I believe. With "thousands of players" occupying the same system, I personally worry about logistical things like starport landing pad availability, what is appearing to need to become a "line" to use the jump points since I think only one person can actually use the gate at a time.. the amount of terminals present at TDDs.. imagine 100 people all trying to use a TDD at once... stuff like that
swear mike somethings forgets that testing is for testing and maybe his first test in server meshing which wasnt and isnt their intended experience going forward
