Can we have a server merger after fee take place ?

[DAOWAce]

1. Latency is not the issue.

People can say however much they want about how the servers are configured 'poorly' and cause 'most' of the delays themselves (which I have not seen complete proof of from SE employees, feel free to link some), but you cannot argue against distance latency. It's better now because the action based combat system was removed (which I didn't like, as I've explained on my forum/blog); but you're still talking about distance latency! The same problem FFXI had; the same reason your casts were interrupted, your interrupts were late, you stood in the fire, you took an arrow in the knee; your reactive fighting ability was limited. It's all the same in FFXIV, and it's all based on distance latency. (Remember NM camping when JP players would provoke things before they even appeared on your client as entities? Yeah, that's from distance latency!)

People can test this type of latency themselves by playing a foreign version of a game that's also available in their region and then switching to their region's version. The difference is night and day. In fact, the difference is like going from dial-up to 10/1Mbit broadband. (Speaking of which, I'm on 60/8Mbit. I like it being useless for gaming because of distance latency!)

I prefer global servers because I don't always play during US primetimes, so I don't want NA only servers.

I rarely play during US primetimes on MMOs I frequent. Why? Mainly because I want to get away from most of the kids, but also because less people on the server = less server latency.

Some of the most memorable MMO moments for me have come while I was playing with people in Australia, Europe, Japan, HK, and other areas who I would not have a chance to play with if we were constricted to only regional servers.

I have memorable moments in FFXI with JP groups. I also wouldn't have met one of my good friends if Australia was blocked from one of the games I played in the past. So yeah, I agree it sucks, but again; that still doesn't change the want for regional servers.

For me, latency = gameplay ability, gameplay = fun. End result? Latency > community.

[Murugan]

People can say however much they want about how the servers are configured 'poorly' and cause 'most' of the delays themselves (which I have not seen complete proof of from SE employees, feel free to link some), but you cannot argue against distance latency. It's better now because the action based combat system was removed (which I didn't like, as I've explained on my forum/blog); but you're still talking about distance latency! The same problem FFXI had; the same reason your casts were interrupted, your interrupts were late, you stood in the fire, you took an arrow in the knee; your reactive fighting ability was limited. It's all the same in FFXIV, and it's all based on distance latency. (Remember NM camping when JP players would provoke things before they even appeared on your client as entities? Yeah, that's from distance latency!)

People can test this type of latency themselves by playing a foreign version of a game that's also available in their region and then switching to their region's version. The difference is night and day. In fact, the difference is like going from dial-up to 10/1Mbit broadband. (Speaking of which, I'm on 60/8Mbit. I like it being useless for gaming because of distance latency!)


I rarely play during US primetimes on MMOs I frequent. Why? Mainly because I want to get away from most of the kids, but also because less people on the server = less server latency.


I have memorable moments in FFXI with JP groups. I also wouldn't have met one of my good friends if Australia was blocked from one of the games I played in the past. So yeah, I agree it sucks, but again; that still doesn't change the want for regional servers.

For me, latency = gameplay ability, gameplay = fun. End result? Latency > community.

Wow you should not be playing MMO's. (I won't even address how wrong you are about everything in FFXI, I'm sorry you never got claims and were terrible at the game, that was your problem not "distance latency".)

I hear single player games have awesome "latency". Enjoy.

[Bahn]

Wow you should not be playing MMO's. (I won't even address how wrong you are about everything in FFXI, I'm sorry you never got claims and were terrible at the game, that was your problem not "distance latency".)

I hear single player games have awesome "latency". Enjoy.

I could've sworn we had two giant threads (where I participated in) where we were able to basically confirm it wasn't the so-called distance latency - or ping - that's causing the issues we're having, but rather the poorly built client and the game not updating the server often enough about changes in our position. Whereas the UI latency was something even Square admitted was built into the game (too lazy to dig up the link on this) to supposedly slow down RMTs by forcing the game to check with the server for every single interaction with the UI. Also the game seems to drop packets quite often, which results in that previous poster trying to do a skill and it not kicking in - this actually makes me mash skills quite a bit to make absolutely sure it went through (I often hit the number row keys 2 or 3 times in succession before proceeding to the next skill).

I played the Japanese version of Phantasy Star Universe, and I sort of "get" what the previous poster is talking about. But the big difference here is in PSU JP:

1) The UI didn't have these unnecessary server side checks and was therefore quick and responsive. The UI only lagged a bit when I went to do things that ACTUALLY affected my character - i.e. equipping an item.

2) The latency was consistent. None of this "I dodged this attack on my screen, but it didn't work, yet the next time I dodge the same attack using the same tactics, it worked". Because the latency was consistent, you knew exactly how to change your tactics to compensate for that latency. The game client always updated the server on where your position was so your position on the map on your client always matched up with the server (if not 200-300 milliseconds behind).

3) Packets (and therefore actions) weren't dropped. I hit a button to do an attack, it always went through. None of this "I thought I hit the button, but it didn't go through" annoyance that's happening in XIV combat.

And if I recall correctly, even Japanese players are noticing the UI latency and the combat latency (most prevalent in the Ifrit fight). Japanese players' pingtimes to their natively hosted servers are in the 10's and 20 ms' - this has NOTHING to do with our physical distance from their servers.

[Jennestia]

People can say however much they want about how the servers are configured 'poorly' and cause 'most' of the delays themselves (which I have not seen complete proof of from SE employees, feel free to link some)

Read interviews. They state it all the time.

Also no, if I was able to play Rift from Japan with almost no latency problems distance is not a contributing factor compared to how well optimized your servers are. It's understandable if you're a european because europe has problems connecting to even American services, let alone asian services.

However FFXI versus FFXIV is light and day in terms of latency and they're both ran by the same company with development teams and servers in the same locations.

In fact, the difference is like going from dial-up to 10/1Mbit broadband

This means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things -- It's all in the optimization and bandwidth on both ends, if you're also on Cable or Satellite, you're not ever getting full speed regardless.

[DAOWAce]

Wow you should not be playing MMO's. (I won't even address how wrong you are about everything in FFXI, I'm sorry you never got claims and were terrible at the game, that was your problem not "distance latency".)

I hear single player games have awesome "latency". Enjoy.

What am I wrong about in FFXI? You had to do all your actions earlier than you would've in order to get them off successfully if you were playing from another continent in respect to where the servers were located. The same stands for every internet based game that exists. You cannot beat mathematics/physics no matter what you may think.

As for your last comment, you appear to just be trolling now, so I wont refrain from ignoring your future posts and possibly reporting you depending on how bad they become.

Read interviews. They state it all the time.

I wouldn't know, the only attention I pay to FFXIV is on the Lodestone. I suppose I'll try to find and read over some articles that talk about it.

Also no, if I was able to play Rift from Japan with almost no latency problems distance is not a contributing factor compared to how well optimized your servers are. It's understandable if you're a european because europe has problems connecting to even American services, let alone asian services.

This is more of an issue of where one is located relative to server locations, so the subject is pretty subjective and cannot be tested without second hand information.

I reside on the east coast of the US. If I connect to a server located in Asia, I have a good 250ms ping to it with no way around it. Connecting to the west coast of the US I get 80ms. That difference is night and day. It's even more drastic when I connect to one of the very few games that hosts east coast servers and get 10-15ms (and what a joy that is).

Light can only travel so fast; nothing will ever change that. That's the point I'm trying to make.

However FFXI versus FFXIV is light and day in terms of latency and they're both ran by the same company with development teams and servers in the same locations.

Again, I wouldn't know how the difference is in present time. I played FFXI back when it was released up until 2005. No doubt technology advanced heavily since then to the point where they could heavily optimize the server infrastructure for FFXI.

This means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things -- It's all in the optimization and bandwidth on both ends, if you're also on Cable or Satellite, you're not ever getting full speed regardless.

Yes, it was just for an example. For someone who goes from dial-up to a decent broadband connection, they're amazed at the clear difference it makes. That's what I was implying.

However, I have to refute your statement about cable internet. If you're on a congested node then yes, you only really get your full speeds at off hours when no one is using the service. But, with DOCSIS 3.0, channel bonding was introduced. Even if you're on a congested node, with channel bonding you'll be able to pull your provisioned speeds practically 24/7, unless the node is so heavily oversold that it just cannot support everyone pulling those speeds at peak hours, which by that time you should be considering changing ISPs.

I use cable internet and I get 60/8Mbps speeds 24/7. I have for the last 10 months. Depending on how my ISP decides to handle their service, those speeds may start to drop in the future if no more bonding channels are added and the node becomes oversold. As much as I would love a fiber optic service (for even less latency), they decided not to run down my street. How unfortunate for me.

[Ilean]

Light can only travel so fast; nothing will ever change that.

Patiently waiting for zero-width wormholes to be invented...