Server Issues and Limitations

[Sorel]

I think the problem with providing information specifically in regard to server issues/crystal tools is that if they start releasing information about what core problems they are encountering, a) it provides an advantage for competition, b) it provides a selling point for other software engine developers to take business from SE, c) the community doesn't really need to know about it... That, and of course industry secrets, etc, etc... The lack of information seems to be more of a business decision, and doesn't really have anything to do with them not wanting to provide the community with more answers.

It would be somewhat lame, but I would accept it if they actually came out and said:

"We cannot implement X feature because of various server issues that we cannot discuss due to RMT/security/corporate espionage risks."

But their not even doing that.

And it's not like we are asking for detailed explanations, IP addresses, or blocks of code here. A sentence or two with nouns other than "server" and "issue" would be enough. But they're not even giving us that.

Use your words, SE. We're not kindergarten students or silver-haired grandmothers. If you happen to use a word that we don't understand, we'll Wikipedia it and get the idea.

[Belial]

It would be somewhat lame, but I would accept it if they actually came out and said:

"We cannot implement X feature because of various server issues that we cannot discuss due to RMT/security/corporate espionage risks."

But their not even doing that.

And it's not like we are asking for detailed explanations, IP addresses, or blocks of code here. A sentence or two with nouns other than "server" and "issue" would be enough. But they're not even giving us that.

Use your words, SE. We're not kindergarten students or silver-haired grandmothers. If you happen to use a word that we don't understand, we'll Wikipedia it and get the idea.

It could very well be that they are literally not allowed to discuss anything. It's called confidentiality, and even though I agree that yea, even a simple few sentences would prove useful, it could very well be something that just simply isn't allowed due to trade secrets. It's very similar to how certain court cases are handled. Yea, someone could come out and squeek a bit of information without causing any real harm, however they are not allowed to discuss even the most mundane aspects due to confidentiality.

[Sorel]

It could very well be that they are literally not allowed to discuss anything. It's called confidentiality, and even though I agree that yea, even a simple few sentences would prove useful, it could very well be something that just simply isn't allowed due to trade secrets. It's very similar to how certain court cases are handled. Yea, someone could come out and squeek a bit of information without causing any real harm, however they are not allowed to discuss even the most mundane aspects due to confidentiality.

Reminds me of a quote from a book I once read.

Catch-22 states that agents enforcing Catch-22 need not prove that Catch-22 actually contains whatever provision the accused violator is accused of violating.

[Sorel]

Now tell me would you understand if SE said "we apologise for the bad latency issues, we have has a consultant in and have been advised that we should change the priorities on all out routers because they arent load balancing enough, Also they have suggested that we reconfigure all routers to use OSPF.

We were told that spanning tree was not functioning correctly which alos impieded the performance of out network.

That is just a small amount jargon that would be in a letter they would tell us. if you know what OSPF, Spanning tree and the specific reasons priorities matter and how routers perform load balancing then its ok, but this kind of letter would go into that much technical detail only a few players will understand because you have to be educated in routing and switching to know what there talking about.

And it's not like we are asking for detailed explanations, IP addresses, or blocks of code here. A sentence or two with nouns other than "server" and "issue" would be enough. But they're not even giving us that.

Use your words, SE. We're not kindergarten students or silver-haired grandmothers. If you happen to use a word that we don't understand, we'll Wikipedia it and get the idea.

Again ... we not asking for every explicit detail of the problem. Just some further explanation other than "server issues".

It's almost like we're back in the old Hiromichi Tanaka days.

Interviewer: Many players have complaints about <<fill in the blank>>. What are your plans to address them?

Tanaka: We cannot say at this time, but please look forward to it!!

Now with Naoki Yoshida at the helm, communication about fixes to current issues and future plans has become much much better, EXCEPT when it comes to the subject of "fixing server issues" ... which BTW is preventing half a dozen other game issues from being resolved.

Seriously, what's up with that??

[Delsus]

Again ... we not asking for every explicit detail of the problem. Just some further explanation other than "server issues".

It's almost like we're back in the old Hiromichi Tanaka days.

Interviewer: Many players have complaints about <<fill in the blank>>. What are your plans to address them?

Tanaka: We cannot say at this time, but please look forward to it!!

Now with Naoki Yoshida at the helm, communication about fixes to current issues and future plans has become much much better, EXCEPT when it comes to the subject of "fixing server issues" ... which BTW is preventing half a dozen other game issues from being resolved.

Seriously, what's up with that??

The server and network problems are probably technical and if they were going to give us inforemation about it they would have to go into detail rather than get a completly ambiguous comment like "we have noticed problems with the router/server/switch/firewall configurations and are working to correct them" if I got that (being educated in networking) I would know that it could take anywhere from a few weeks (if they knew the exact problem and has everything completly documented) to a few months and I would need to know more, a router config for a large company could have hundreds of commands that need to be sifted through to fix somthing.

Sometimes it is alot easier to wipe a configuration and start from scratch, but that can bring the network down if it isn't done carefully, and takes awhile to get clearance which is why companies rarely do that, they take the time sifting through the commands.

Again all they can say is "we know there are server/network problems and we are working to address them" or give us details about the problems even the smallest detail about a network can open it up to hacks, who needs IP configs if they give us one protocol they use I can use nslookup to get the ip of one of thier servers then launch a ping sweep of thier whole network through that open port from one protocol they leaked.

If you think they can give us more info without giving us info then give me an example that isnt just "we know there are problems and we are working to resolve them"

[Sorel]

If you think they can give us more info without giving us info then give me an example that isnt just "we know there are problems and we are working to resolve them"

Possible Examples:

We are working to reconfigure server storage to allow for <<insert feature here>>, but it will take some time.

We are working to steamline network communications to improve <<insert feature here>>.

We are planning on updating our databases to make it easier to <<insert feature here>>, but we won't be able to complete that until after <<insert feature here>> is implemented.

And the Development Team doesn't have to explain every little detail when they do this. They don't when they talk to us about other aspects of the game. They don't detail the new crafting algorithms to us when they tell us about crafting ... they don't tell us the additional lighting and shader effects when they talk about improved animations ... and they don't tell us the polygon count when they announce new armor.

So I don't see why the Development Team would be forced to give us every detail of their internal IT structure when they talk to us about the "server issues" that are plaguing FFXIV.

We just want the Development Team to communicate about the server issues the same way they communicate about fixing every other issue in the game.

[Delsus]

Possible Examples:







And the Development Team doesn't have to explain every little detail when they do this. They don't when they talk to us about other aspects of the game. They don't detail the new crafting algorithms to us when they tell us about crafting ... they don't tell us the additional lighting and shader effects when they talk about improved animations ... and they don't tell us the polygon count when they announce new armor.

So I don't see why the Development Team would be forced to give us every detail of their internal IT structure when they talk to us about the "server issues" that are plaguing FFXIV.

We just want the Development Team to communicate about the server issues the same way they communicate about fixing every other issue in the game.

There still as ambiguous as "server issues" they dont tell me anything except they want to add new features, all those would do is fuel the arguments that SE dont know what the problems are, I would prefer them to say nothing, then see in patch notes that the server and network infrastructure have been optimised.

If I heard those I would want to know the problems because I know that streamlining network comminications can take a few seconds if it is an interface priority problem preventing effective loadballancing, or a few weeks if they have to order new interfaces and configure said interfaces, lets also not forget that other part of the configuration could need changing for an interface replacement.

And if they need to replace outdated routers and switches, you better hope they have thier configurations backed up...

[VydarrTyr]

Again ... we not asking for every explicit detail of the problem. Just some further explanation other than "server issues".

Well, you're asking for that now. But the OP isn't asking for it. And to be honest, I can't remember anyone else ever asking for it. So while I would agree with those suggesting that it would be a bad idea for SE to reveal that info, at the very least we can hopefully show some patience and wait for an explanation until after we've asked.

As for the OP, here's a bit of the Famitsu interview posted by the incredible, inimitable, subligar-sporting Reinhart:

Famitsu: How about delivery?

Yoshida: We will implement delivery, but it will be after server modifications. Message and letter will be same.

Famitsu: When a player has something for repair up in bazaar and has item full you cannot repair that persons damaged equipment. Are there any plans to fix this?

Yoshida: It will be hard to do right away but we are going to make changes how the trade window works so along with that we would like to work on this.

...

Famitsu: Do you have plans for changes to party search feature?

Yoshida: First we will make minimum required changes to the current UI and with server repair planning to release redesigned search feature. In patch 1.18 part of it will be modified. Forming parties with search feature means forming with random people and it might troublesome for some (laugh) so some just try it once and get angry and don’t use again…. It’s right that easier search feature and UI is needed but lastly it’s really up to the player to have courage.

Famitsu: How about the area search feature?

Yoshida: Along with party search this is also going to be redesigned

Famitsu: Will it be possible to show more details for linkshell members?

Yoshida: Not only linkshell but for friendlist same type of system is required so it is being looked into carefully.

Famitsu: What kind of measures is being taken for inventory space as with armory system you will require to carry a lot of equipment?

Yoshida: might say not that again, but this will be after repairs to the root. Plan is already made but will need to be changed along with swapping the UI. Will try to make it by PS3 release but currently can’t give exact date on it yet.

Hope that resolves your issue.

[Sorel]

Well, you're asking for that now. But the OP isn't asking for it. And to be honest, I can't remember anyone else ever asking for it. So while I would agree with those suggesting that it would be a bad idea for SE to reveal that info, at the very least we can hopefully show some patience and wait for an explanation until after we've asked.

The subject of the "server issues" and "server optimizations" and "server repairs" has been one of the recurring themes of several threads, but there have been only two threads that I could find that directly asks the Development Team about these "server issues". This thread is one, and the other thread is below.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...lly-addressed.

Now granted, both threads are less than a week old. I'll give you that. So I think the call for patience in waiting for a response to these server issue questions is not unfounded.

Nonetheless, question has now been officially asked, the challenge has been formally issued, and the gauntlet is now irrevocably thrown.

Now we wait, and see what the Development Team has to say on this.

[captainpicard]

Perhaps SE folks did the art work, and outsourced the rest of it to a North Korean or Chinese developer. If you have ever worked in project management, with complex vendor relationships, its very easy for the vendor to start dropping the ball, or leave you completely screwed. Perhaps the vendor fulfilled the contractual obligations with SE, and the result was the game we received at launch. Perhaps the vendor deferred or deleted any number of requirements from the project due to failure to deliver, and so what we got was half a product that barely works. Now the SE staff has scrambled to actually try and 1) understand the vendor code 2) begin to try and modify it to improve upon things.

It may sound far fetched, but we are dealing with this very scenario on one of the projects at my employer.

It would explain a lot. If it were true, it explains a whole lot about why the game launched like it did. i.e. - we poured X dollars into the vendor relationship, at minimum lets recoup what we can on boxed sales.

Meanwhile, stubbornly, rather than just kill it, they have endeavored to keep it on life support, with the far fetched hope that it may be profitable one day, IF they can get it into a better place with as few resources as possible. If they had a real solid number of people working on this project, it would be much further along, and thats a fact. I think they are throwing as few resources at it as possible in the hopes that they can push it out again on PS3 (boxed sales - more revenue recoupment) charge a monthly fee to a small audience that is just enough to cover the costs that went into getting it to that state, and cross their fingers that due to HOW BAD IT IS, people will say HOW FAR ITS COME and be blind to the reality that this sucker plays like its 1999.

That said I don't hate the game, but its in a woefully precarious place.