|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 13:27:57 GMT -5
I feel free to complain about connection interrupteds and host migrations all day eryday. If I had to blame anything I would blame the 3arc or whatever for scrub hosts being taken, as in, where the host is so bad that everyone in the lobby is teleporting or on a 2-bar. How many times do I have to say this, game? Gimme host! (/joke) If you have played any console FPS game in the past seven years...one always has to just take a chill pill during the first few weeks, maybe even longer. Most of these games always have some lag or other net code issue going on initially. That's just the how things are, when a new game gets tested out with 1 million plus users on a nightly basis. Over time, soon enough, things stablize. Just learn to accept the above for now, and roll with it. What is more important than 'how' the game plays in the first few weeks....is the response and actions taken afterwards. And with that, as much as i bust on Treyarch, ...they tend to be very quick with resolving issues. Even with the lag, the last week, two weeks, have been considerably better than the first two weeks. And let's be real here. Treyarch could put in some magical net code fix in tomorrow, removing all lag....and probably half the player base would still whine like girls about how 'lag' made them have a bad game. I see this ALL the time. Even amongst friends. First time they have a bad game, it's always 'the lag'. "Lag" is like the boogey man that ruins everything. And most people when they quit, ....they are just using 'lag' as an excuse to get out of having their asses handed to them in a game. THAT is reality.
|
|
danoski666
True Bro
"He ran off the wall like a ninja!"
Posts: 2,484
|
Post by danoski666 on Dec 19, 2012 13:29:08 GMT -5
I actually havent even played BO2 during the first 3 weeks since it came out.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 13:31:04 GMT -5
I actually havent even played BO2 during the first 3 weeks since it came out. imho, 'lag' has dropped off considerably since November. Also, wait times getting in games has dropped a lot too. Party functions are working somewhat better, and other net code things have improved. I am still seeing some issues with GW (9v9), but i'll sit tight and wait. There are other game modes to play instead.
|
|
danoski666
True Bro
"He ran off the wall like a ninja!"
Posts: 2,484
|
Post by danoski666 on Dec 19, 2012 13:32:57 GMT -5
Argh, but my biggest problem is constant connection interrupted and host migrations, apart from that I barely experience lag(expect that one time I got thrown into a 1-bar FFA lobby with 300ms ping or something ridiculous like that for no reason).
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 13:35:21 GMT -5
Argh, but my biggest problem is constant connection interrupted and host migrations, apart from that I barely experience lag(expect that one time I got thrown into a 1-bar FFA lobby with 300ms ping or something ridiculous like that for no reason). That's from people quitting. Not Treyarch's fault. And they are quitting because they mostly don't want their KD ratio to suffer. One of these games, 3A or IW is going to figure out that KD ratio is the single biggest thing that wrecks gameplay. Eliminate KD, and host migrations and quitting probably falls off by 90%.
|
|
danoski666
True Bro
"He ran off the wall like a ninja!"
Posts: 2,484
|
Post by danoski666 on Dec 19, 2012 13:37:13 GMT -5
IDK about that. If I quit its because of getting into one of the ridiculous lag lobbies, a game in progress that we will lose regardless of what I do or if I am simply not willing to put up with whatever is going on in the lobby(ex. Turbine with 5 snipers on my team, although that is yet to happen).
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 13:45:43 GMT -5
IDK about that. If I quit its because of getting into one of the ridiculous lag lobbies, a game in progress that we will lose regardless of what I do or if I am simply not willing to put up with whatever is going on in the lobby(ex. Turbine with 5 snipers on my team, although that is yet to happen). ok...but like with the GiP issue. Games in progress happen because someone originally quit. I also didn't say all quitting is due to KD. I said 'most'. If you brought up some mega survey that looked into why people quit, 'KD' (ie, doing poorly as measured by the KD ratio) is going to be the no 1 root cause.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 13:49:25 GMT -5
Addressing your points. Not to be a cheerleader for Treyarch, but come on. - Ded servers. Please. Give this a rest. I can go onto dozens of BF3 forums now and finds thousands of those players grumbling over everything from cheating, to 'for-pay-passes' to dozens of threads of people complaining about for-rent Ded servers in private matches. Having Ded servers, or the hybrid variation thing EA/Dice did, isn't some wonder cure to fix all issues. Seriously, there's probably more threads on those forums calling EA/Dice 'cheap' than Treyarch. - "also their claim is bs"...Actually, it wasn't. Go read the article. They made no claim. All that said was that this is the net. It's not perfect. There are external factors like the neighbor thing, that are simply beyond the control of Gaming systems that rely on the net. That's what they said, and it's 100% accurate. It's just reality of FPS net play. Net = lag sometimes. Done. Treyarch is just attempting to be honest about this, and if you have a bad provider that jams up at certain times of the day...i guess avoid those times rather than get all angry. If a person can't handle this reality, need some fantasy lag free world....stop playing and go outside, pick up jogging for a hobby. They won't have to worry about lag then. - As far as not owing Treyarch anything? Ok? You don't. Everyone knows that, even Treyarch. So if you want to rage quit all you want, knock yourself out. I'm just saying that if you do, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on, especially if you are complaining about to many game interruptions, host migrations and other issues like that. Which are mostly the fault of a pansy-assed player base that quit over their KD ratio at the drop of a hat. Quit the quitting, and host migration lag issues will disappear over night. Seriously, your life won't be THAT affected if you just play an extra min or two, and finish games. It's not the end of the world. servers are not great on BF3, i've played 9 months of them but its definitely no where as bad as cod hosting schemes. people who complain about bf3 servers are spoiled. i'll happily admit i was one of those spoiled gamers complaining about after experiencing this 'internet issue' sine black ops 1. i know it's the internet. thats why i think that servers will help mitagate these outside factors. again, servers aren't the all be all but they are definitely more stable than relying on 1 random host. Or a system that chooses a host server which does NOT factor in the real-life situation (porn dling, wifi, internet etc). the dedicated server has only 1 job, while the random host using current cod system has to deal with these outside factors not under treyarch control. eff you trayarch/activision, you don't have to control these factors or be ok with your ishy system because these factors are the reason why you have so many connection issues. again, people rage-quitting wouldn't bother a server. right now the solution for everyone to stop quitting games will never happen. its a vicious cycle. so you can be mad and whine at people that rage quit and call them babies, whiners or what not for quitting games. i'll be the more reasonable and logical person and get mad at treyarch/activision for allowing a system to crash and ruin my fun because someone happened to turn off their system for (1) ragequitting (2) didn't want to play anymore (3) emergency and they had to turn off their console (4) lost connection due to a lag spike (5) insert out of control factor...i wouldn't care if half the time host migration didn't kick everyone back to the lobby.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 13:53:19 GMT -5
IDK about that. If I quit its because of getting into one of the ridiculous lag lobbies, a game in progress that we will lose regardless of what I do or if I am simply not willing to put up with whatever is going on in the lobby(ex. Turbine with 5 snipers on my team, although that is yet to happen). this, oretty much.. only reason's i leave, or if i get a squad invite.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 13:58:58 GMT -5
so you can be mad and whine at people that rage quit and call them babies, whiners or what not for quitting games. i'll be the more reasonable and logical person and get mad at treyarch/activision for allowing a system to crash and ruin my fun because someone happened to turn off their system for (1) ragequitting (2) didn't want to play anymore (3) emergency and they had to turn off their console (4) lost connection due to a lag spike (5) insert out of control factor...i wouldn't care if half the time host migration didn't kick everyone back to the lobby. There's nothing logical about what you said. It make no sense. I'm directing my insults in the proper direction. The players. They CHOOSE to quit games. Treyarch didn't decide to exit the game for them. You? You are directing your insults at Treyarch, for something that is mostly out of their control....quitting, which causes the host migration issues.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 14:00:13 GMT -5
IDK about that. If I quit its because of getting into one of the ridiculous lag lobbies, a game in progress that we will lose regardless of what I do or if I am simply not willing to put up with whatever is going on in the lobby(ex. Turbine with 5 snipers on my team, although that is yet to happen). this, oretty much.. only reason's i leave, or if i get a squad invite. one person quitting, can in theory ultimately open up/create twenty plus game-in-progress spots opening up. I've even seen it open up as many as like forty. That's the power of one person quitting.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Dec 19, 2012 14:06:12 GMT -5
The point he's making is that quitting would't cause host migration issues if we had dedis. The players suck, but the devs could create an environment in which players' quitting/porn/netflix etc didn't influence host bandwidth. They don't.
There is a lot that could be done to help connectivity, but it won't be done because they realize they don't have to do it. It's simple cost-benefit reasoning. They could spend thousands of man/hours and dollars to set up dedis, search preferences and a server browser; and the only players who pay enough attention to appreciate it are players like the ones here (who are going to bitch and moan but buy the game anyway). It's not worth it to them.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 14:10:43 GMT -5
The point he's making is that quitting would't cause host migration issues if we had dedis. The players suck, but the devs could create an environment in which players' quitting/porn/netflix etc didn't influence host bandwidth. They don't. There is a lot that could be done to help connectivity, but it won't be done because they realize they don't have to do it. It's simple cost-benefit reasoning. They could spend thousands of man/hours and dollars to set up dedis, search preferences and a server browser; and the only players who pay enough attention to appreciate it are players like the ones here (who are going to bit ch and moan but buy the game anyway). It's not worth it to them. It wouldn't be worth it to you either if it were YOUR business. It's always easy to spend someone else's money and tell them what do with it. Not so easy, when it's your own money. So as it is....the whole ded server point is kind of irrelevant, in terms of 'solutions'. They don't have them and won't have them in the near future. And even if they did, as seen with BF3, the b1tchfest will still continue by the same amount of players, even with Ded servers (not enough servers, rent a servers, wait times, cheating, paypasses, etc....) Move on and hope what can be fixed, will be.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 14:11:15 GMT -5
so you can be mad and whine at people that rage quit and call them babies, whiners or what not for quitting games. i'll be the more reasonable and logical person and get mad at treyarch/activision for allowing a system to crash and ruin my fun because someone happened to turn off their system for (1) ragequitting (2) didn't want to play anymore (3) emergency and they had to turn off their console (4) lost connection due to a lag spike (5) insert out of control factor...i wouldn't care if half the time host migration didn't kick everyone back to the lobby. There's nothing logical about what you said. It make no sense. I'm directing my insults in the proper direction. The players. They CHOOSE to quit games. Treyarch didn't decide to exit the game for them. You? You are directing your insults at Treyarch, for something that is mostly out of their control....quitting, which causes the host migration issues. it must be they way i post....how is it ok for their host migration to utterly fail at times because people quit? their host migration algorithm is not robust at all. 1 individual quitting should not send their program spiraling into host migration after host migration until it completely fails and kicks everyone into the lobby if not back to their main home screen to search for games again. or when the host migration doesn't pick up and we play an entire game until at the very end it does a host migration. failing to detect that everyone is on 1-2 bars. am i the only one that deals with this? i am the only one thats not ok with is? how are you ok with this lol? how are you willing to take the blame or blame the community for an obvious bad design?
|
|
danoski666
True Bro
"He ran off the wall like a ninja!"
Posts: 2,484
|
Post by danoski666 on Dec 19, 2012 14:11:44 GMT -5
Face it - CoD on console is never getting Dedis.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 14:13:05 GMT -5
The point he's making is that quitting would't cause host migration issues if we had dedis. The players suck, but the devs could create an environment in which players' quitting/porn/netflix etc didn't influence host bandwidth. They don't. There is a lot that could be done to help connectivity, but it won't be done because they realize they don't have to do it. It's simple cost-benefit reasoning. They could spend thousands of man/hours and dollars to set up dedis, search preferences and a server browser; and the only players who pay enough attention to appreciate it are players like the ones here (who are going to bit ch and moan but buy the game anyway). It's not worth it to them. pretty much aidsx3. *internet hug*
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 14:16:38 GMT -5
it must be they way i post....how is it ok for their host migration to utterly fail at times because people quit? their host migration algorithm is not robust at all. 1 individual quitting should not send their program spiraling into host migration after host migration until it completely fails and kicks everyone into the lobby if not back to their main home screen to search for games again. I have not seen the 'host migration' code fail one single time in BO2. Not once. If the 'host migration' sign pops up, it's been 100% effective to date in reforming the lobby. And I've even seen a game where the host changed hands 13 or 14 times. I posted on this. The code they use seems to me, very strong. It works without fail. That said, sometimes the system fails when the host pulls the plug on the XBox. Dashboarding. It's already been discussed to death and that's not an example of the HM code failing. The HM code can't work under those circumstances, it never got started. And dashing.....that's due to PLAYERS quitting. I have seen this, but its' rare. Nothing to start posts about.
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on Dec 19, 2012 14:21:16 GMT -5
Face it - CoD on console is never getting Dedis. PC users shouldn't assume they won't bring back MW2's IW net hosting system. "If it doesn't effect my life or my rights, I'm all for (insert issue)."
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Dec 19, 2012 14:28:25 GMT -5
On dedis there would be no host migration algorithm, because there would be no host migration. No games ended by disconnect. It's almost certainly a pipe dream, but it cannot be said that there is no solution to the problem. Unwillingness to implement a solution is not the same as no solution. Activision's reasoning makes sense from a bottom line standpoint; dedicated servers won't become a reality for this series until the bottom line changes. If sales were to start dropping, for example, tough questions might start to be asked. Alternatively, they might introduce "CoD Premium," where you gain access to dedis etc for an additional monthly fee. I'd pay.
I'm not saying we should sit in a circle, beat drums and bemoan the evils of corporate greed. I'm just saying there is a world of difference between "We can't fix this" and "We won't fix this." There's an awful lot of "why??!?!" to be heard on these forums and others, and it's unproductive. There is no grand mystery to be solved. The system is good enough to pay the bills, and for some developers that's as good as it's ever going to be.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 14:37:17 GMT -5
On dedis there would be no host migration algorithm, because there would be no host migration. No games ended by disconnect. It's almost certainly a pipe dream, but it cannot be said that there is no solution to the problem. My point was that while host migration there might stop, other issues then surface up if Ded Servers are used. It's not a wonder cure. Again, look at all the various hate threads on BF3 forums. There are to many to count threads complaining about the DeD server system. The question here is...what is the real problem? Is it truly host migration? I don't think it is. Is it really even lag? Like I said before,if some wonder device was made that elminated all lag....and it wasn't mentioned online.....a certain pct of the player base would still be quitting and blaming lag as the problem for the performance issues. And if they find out lag is gone, ...something else will pop up. Look at the menopausal hysteria on this board, amongst all the so called CoD superstars, over the invisible boogeyman known as 'SBMM'. So again, the hard question here is....what really is the so called 'problem'? You can't really fix something, unless you know what is truly wrong.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Dec 19, 2012 14:53:17 GMT -5
Connectivity is a huge problem. Dedicated servers are better than the listen server arrangement currently in use; that is why they are universally preferred both in the CoD PC community and elsewhere. FPS in a competitive setting play over LAN whenever possible, and online organized play has special provisions for equalizing connection advantage (host switching, lag checks, etc). It's a major issue.
That's not saying it's the only problem, obviously. But I don't think it's fair to say the existence of other problems somehow negates the existence of any one of them. The fact that someone somewhere will complain regardless doesn't make the problem go away, either. If I snapped my fingers and cured cancer right now, the headline on FOX tomorrow would be "4352362 oncologists now without work." The fact that somebody is upset about SBMM doesn't make connectivity less of a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Broadband on Dec 19, 2012 15:02:31 GMT -5
I'm surprised skill is the second factor. I'm sure skill based matchmaking exists, but maybe only about 60% of the time. The other 40% of the time, I'm always paired up with people whose thumbs are up their ass facing a well organized full party of 6. It pisses me off to no end. BO2 needs a Mercenary playlist that only contains TDM and KC.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 15:07:28 GMT -5
Connectivity is a huge problem. Dedicated servers are better than the listen server arrangement currently in use; that is why they are universally preferred both in the CoD PC community and elsewhere. FPS in a competitive setting play over LAN whenever possible, and online organized play has special provisions for equalizing connection advantage (host switching, lag checks, etc). It's a major issue. Connectivity is a broad term. I think for the most part, probably 999 out of the last 1,000 games I have tied to connect into, ended up connecting for me. And its' usually fast. What if it's slower with Ded servers? Connectivity encompasses a wide range of things. And once in a game, is lag truly the no 1 issue amongst the player base? Maybe? Maybe not. As I said, most players have no clue what they are looking at. If Lag is the no 1 issue, it's only because players blame it for everything in this game by default. You could remove all lag from CoD, and 'lag' will still be the no1 issue in every survey. So it's impossible to truly measure. It's never the players fault for playing like a retard, it's always 'lag'. You know this. And what's universally approved/endorsed for competitive gaming, is mostly irrelevant for the player base as a whole. So few players are traveling around the country competing in tournaments, where prize money and other things are offered. The point here is IF Ded servers solve one issue....the gaming environment isn't improved if another possibly bigger issue takes it's place. People seem to think the implementation of Ded Servers cures all ills. It won't. It's not that simple.
|
|
|
Post by Broadband on Dec 19, 2012 15:10:05 GMT -5
It won't solve all problems but it will be such a huge improvement. Just look at Gears 2 vs. Gears 3. Night and day difference.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Dec 19, 2012 15:16:50 GMT -5
The point here is IF Ded servers solve one issue....the gaming environment isn't improved if another possibly bigger issue takes it's place. People seem to think the implementation of Ded Servers cures all ills. It won't. It's not that simple. Nobody thinks dedis would solve every problem. Dedis would just happen to go a long way toward solving what is probably the biggest one.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 15:18:57 GMT -5
The point here is IF Ded servers solve one issue....the gaming environment isn't improved if another possibly bigger issue takes it's place. People seem to think the implementation of Ded Servers cures all ills. It won't. It's not that simple. Nobody thinks dedis would solve every problem. Dedis would just happen to go a long way toward solving what is probably the biggest one. this again. like i posted, servers are not perfect but it will avoid a whole slew of issues/outside factors that are obviously bothering the current system. it's obvious jw is connect to the backbone of the internet lol
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 15:21:55 GMT -5
It won't solve all problems but it will be such a huge improvement. Just look at Gears 2 vs. Gears 3. Night and day difference. yes. GoW1 and 2 had millions of people screaming about host advantage, as well as to many to mention issues with bad programming. Junk game. And then GoW3 came out, Ded servers....and what happened? GoW3 had masses of people screaming bloody murder over the Ded server use and DLC content, restrictions on it. A split community. Huge issues. Everyone is screaming and calling Epic 'cheap' and 'bloodsucking capitalists'. Nice huh? So much for being nice with the Ded servers.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Dec 19, 2012 15:30:16 GMT -5
and btw, did the Ded Servers solve the GoW3 lag issue stuff?
Hell no. Google "Lag + GoW3" and one will find hundreds of not thousands of links of players complaining about 'lag'. I thought lag was gone? How is it still there? Shows my point that Ded Servers will not solve the lag issue. Why? The issue isn't lag, it's players performance. Even if lag is gone, players will still blame lag.
|
|
|
Post by wantonRULE on Dec 19, 2012 15:31:15 GMT -5
ok, jw you win.
we'll deal with this crappy...errr... not so bad system and assume that future cod on dedi servers will be bad and will never, ever, ever, ever, ever x inifinity solve anything.
i'm going home, good night
|
|
markopolo
True Bro
Once a LMG Camper, Then a Voidlock, Now a Lexington 25-8-366 Runner
Posts: 5,567
|
Post by markopolo on Dec 19, 2012 15:31:54 GMT -5
It won't solve all problems but it will be such a huge improvement. Just look at Gears 2 vs. Gears 3. Night and day difference. yes. GoW1 and 2 had millions of people screaming about host advantage, as well as to many to mention issues with bad programming. Junk game. And then GoW3 came out, Ded servers....and what happened? GoW3 had masses of people screaming bloody murder over the Ded server use and DLC content, restrictions on it. A split community. Huge issues. Everyone is screaming and calling Epic 'cheap' and 'bloodsucking capitalists'. Nice huh? So much for being nice with the Ded servers. So...... what you're saying is that no matter what gets done to "fix the problem" the fix never is good enough. So there's no point fixing the problem.... because no matter what the fix it, it won't fix the problem... so you slice and dice and flip out a "new" system that really isn't new but just rebranded but never change it... and because it's shiney and new, people will think that you'e done something, but really, you've just put lipstick on a pig and done nothing of concequence. And before you say, "But then people will leave the series and it'll die!!!" no it won't. Not when the series is still shattering records like dishes and glassware at 5 trillion Greek weddings. People might rage quit and leave... they will be replaced or they will silently come back.
|
|