How do you feel about them talking about divided servers?

[Delsus]

I'm sorry to jump on you so, but... I'm afraid you're talking out of your bottom in this case, operating on understandable logic though you seem to be. Changes to servers' physical locations are something they are merely considering for the future, not a part of the current plan. The present language-based server plans are for communication and the slight increase in playability might come from players lagging a little less dissimilarly to one another, but no less across the board. At the present moment, they are focusing on latency minimisation without moving the servers.

Here:






Now, on that, I can agree with you.

What looking at reducing latency without moving the servers means is checking router settings to make sure they are all load balacing properly, check they are using the most efficiant protocols, checking switch configuration and things they can do on the firewalls, also checking the actual servers to make sure they are using the best equpment and the servers are setup as efficiantly as possible. However they have seen that the physical servers aren't capable of much more network wise than they are doing, which is why they are moving to the 2.0 servers.

And as I said the 2.0 servers arent at SE yet so they will look in on the 2.0 test server they will have and open it to people in the regional offices to check the latency around the world, and if it is unacceptable they will have no choice to move them out of Japan if they use regional servers.

They should beable to get the latency down to atleast 0.2sec with the 2.0 servers and any changes they do with the networking equipment without any problem with the servers in Japan, if they are using up to date equipment it should go down more.

[Apricoth]

Ya know, I cant help but feeling like were missing a rather large hunk of the information on the new server structures.

Yeah I am wondering the same thing. Is what we have read the entire picture? If it is... Meh.. Makes me cry a little inside at the thought that it appears they are contemplating how we are interpreting this.

[Fensfield]

And as I said the 2.0 servers arent at SE yet so they will look in on the 2.0 test server they will have and open it to people in the regional offices to check the latency around the world, and if it is unacceptable they will have no choice to move them out of Japan if they use regional servers.

They should beable to get the latency down to atleast 0.2sec with the 2.0 servers and any changes they do with the networking equipment without any problem with the servers in Japan, if they are using up to date equipment it should go down more.

I'm sorry, what you said was:

The servers will not be segrigared by language to allow people to communicate better, they will segrigate by region, so they can have the US servers in America, the EU servers in London (probably) and the Japanese servers in Tokyo

'Will' as opposed to 'May', with, at the time, no mention of their focusing first on mitigating lag without having to deal with the huge expense involved in moving the servers and subsequently maintaining them overseas.

That's what I was replying to. I'm sorry, my last post was not a direct argument with your standpoint on the issue at hand, wholly against segregation though I may be; it was simply a response to your seemingly stating the possibility (thus far seemingly implied as a final option and quite unlikely due to all the improvements could be made without moving) of the servers moving as if it were a fact.

Call it a nitpick if you want, but enough people in this thread are making that mistake as to make me feel it's important to correct that and offer a source.

So.. yeah, 'glad you seem to understand and all. Sorry.

[Jinko]

Fensfield there is two different latencies at work here.

One from your computer through a lot of ISP servers crossing the ocean hitting Japanese ISPs and then finally SE's server and then all the way back again. (nothing much can be done about this)

The other is the speed at which the servers process the data and from looking at the Ifrit fight its pretty high (possibly seconds) this is the biggest problem with out a doubt and this will be dealt with when they move to the new 2.0 servers.

However the 200-300 ms of network latency is still an issue when playing face paced encounters like Ifrit, I'll be ineterested to see how the moogle fights turns out.

[Delsus]

I'm sorry, what you said was:


'Will' as opposed to 'May', with, at the time, no mention of their focusing first on mitigating lag without having to deal with the huge expense involved in moving the servers and subsequently maintaining them overseas.

That's what I was replying to. I'm sorry, my last post was not a direct argument with your standpoint on the issue at hand, wholly against segregation though I may be; it was simply a response to your seemingly stating the possibility (thus far seemingly implied as a final option and quite unlikely due to all the improvements could be made without moving) of the servers moving as if it were a fact.

Call it a nitpick if you want, but enough people in this thread are making that mistake as to make me feel it's important to correct that and offer a source.

So.. yeah, 'glad you seem to understand and all. Sorry.

Your quote from the interview with Yoshi-P was saying that they would look into reducing latency without moving the servers, I was just saying what they can do to reduce latency at thier end. However if they do choose regional servers, they may just decide that because the community wants regional servers in the region they are serving they may choose to put the 2.0 servers there especially if they need new networking hardware to reduce the latency for overseas users they may just put the buy the new servers in the region they are going to be based, so US servers bought in the US, EU servers bought in EU and JP servers bought in Japan, which could save them money, we dont have alot of information about thier systems except they are using new servers for 2.0, so this is a reasonable outcome if they decide on regional servers (no thanks).

We agree on the topic at hand which is good enough for me, and I know about this sort of thing so I thought I would throw a few ways they can look into reducing the latency from thier end incase anyone wanted to know.

Fensfield there is two different latencies at work here.

One from your computer through a lot of ISP servers crossing the ocean hitting Japanese ISPs and then finally SE's server and then all the way back again. (nothing much can be done about this)

The other is the speed at which the servers process the data and from looking at the Ifrit fight its pretty high (possibly seconds) this is the biggest problem with out a doubt and this will be dealt with when they move to the new 2.0 servers.

However the 200-300 ms of network latency is still an issue when playing face paced encounters like Ifrit, I'll be ineterested to see how the moogle fights turns out.

This is true, and from what has been seen and from what players have said it seems to be more the latency at SE's end, rather than the path to the servers, the damage from Ifrit's eruption and plumes is done by your location on the servers which is why the players can be away from the danger area and still get damaged. I would expect the Japanese are seeing some of this as well because when I was fighting Ifrit last night I had a friend from Canada, one from Portugal and me seeing the same things when Canada and US is actually closer to the servers than EU, if the problem was the latency to the servers rather than the latency on SE's network if anything in Canada it should be easier to avoid eruption and plumes.

I would expect them to make the moogle fight less dependant on latency and just add different ways to make it more of a challange, but all things considered there isnt alot they can do with it because so much is dependant on latency, say moogle attacks every 2 seconds, but the latency is 3 seconds healers will really have a hard time because they are effectively missing a whole attack but as you said we will have to wait and see.

[Anapingofness]

Personally I'm against divided servers. The fact that the servers weren't divided in FFXI made it so much more enjoyable and not just that, but educational as well.

Being able to interact with people from different cultures is a part of what made FFXI so memorable.

In regards to the stereotypes... well all I have to say, in my experience with the JP players in FFXI... I've met a total of two JP players that were nice to me but those experiences were worth dealing or in many cases, not dealing with JP players.
The JP players may think of themselves as more patient and less rude but I call BS on that. I think they're equal with the world in terms of rudeness, lack of patience, and the like as well as the reverse.

I mean I understand there are vast cultural differences between the U.S. and Japan, but no one side is better. I think it would be more beneficial to all of the players NA, JP, and EU alike to step out of their comfort zones and learn a little.

However, it seems that the JP's finally got their region specific servers (they've been wanting them since FFXI) and I'll respect that. Personally, I'll play on a global server and that's all there is to it.