Why the netcode issue exists, and why it cannot be fixed.

[Anera]

this is getting worse and worse update after update The Second Coil of Bahamut T4 sooo laggy

[raelgun]

what gets me with this situation is, SE seems to care more about hackers then the playerbase who play legit which is the major side to this and screws them over, what i dont understand is, why they thought they could stop hackers, if theres money to be made for hackers, what security software can they make that wont hinder the majority of the playerbase more that can stop them, hackers can not be stopped, the people that would of hacked with a client side game, have already hacked this game, so doesnt make any sense. warcraft is very responsive cos its entirely client side, they actively try to tackle the hackers, hey its what we are paying them for as well.

[DayHealer]

The reasons why SE would choose server dictated live-state:
-Prevents desync bugs (on the server)
-Prevents countless potential duping bugs
-Prevents (in theory) teleportation and other unauthorized client commands from being accepted
-If the player has a good connection to the server, little to no delay is observed by the player

The detractors of server live-state:
-Poor connections results in nearly unplayable conditions, specifically conditions which require fast reaction time
-Server infrastructure is more costly (servers must do much more data processing)

In the past, server live-state was extremely rare because internet connections were still poor / narrow-band.

Can it be changed?
Short answer: No.
Long Answer: Technically, yes, but it would be extremely costly and time consuming. SE Would lose millions and it would take months to over a year to accomplish.

I hope I explained things well enough for most people to understand. Let me know if you want clarification on anything.

Cheers.

Thanks for the explanation. I think this is not a priority unless people play PvP or chocobo racing maybe? Game have many other more important problems than this one.

[R041]

Thanks for the explanation. I think this is not a priority unless people play PvP or chocobo racing maybe? Game have many other more important problems than this one.

... You replied to a 10 year old post, and that post didn't even know what they were talking about. lol

Most online games are Server Authoritative and run a simulated version of the game. Even 10 years ago we didn't have many pure Peer to Peer games, and they sure as hell were never MMO. MMO 'live state' is not rare. It's never been rare. It's the only way to have an MMO.

Also, he's wrong about what a live state is anyway - It's not 100% server authoritative. There's a mix of who's authority at any given time, and for what action. It's not so cut and dry. You can jump and run, and visually it's still snappy. But server is authority over what happens to you at that position in certain conditions. Like a Damage AoE.

[Themarvin]

Poor connections is a big part of the community and playerbase that has that, that is why you can't just switch type.

Connection is not the same as how much you can download or upload per second either, can't measure it in that.

My connection EU side gives me a ping at around 16ms to the server... I live in Denmark and the Server is in Frankfurt Germany, thats 830km distance you can then have another ISP that runs in different network and have 2-3x times higher ping but the same down/upload.

[Katish]

Here's an answer they could do and would be cost effective... just move the connections for bosses and dungeons and raids from server or client reliant to peer-to-peer connection. This making it a hybrid configuration. Only server checks needed would be is what is needed to be checked. Some mmos and games have already embraced this level of thinking. The major flaw of this is variation in connections and keeping unimportant things in packets sent and received, although in a global mmo that people want to have be region unlocked it would be for the best. Just optimize the fights based on average response time. [Nexon has done this to a varying degree]

[R041]

Here's an answer they could do and would be cost effective... just move the connections for bosses and dungeons and raids from server or client reliant to peer-to-peer connection. Only server checks needed would be is what is needed to be checked. Some mmos and game have already embraced this.The major flaw of this is variation in connections and keeping unimportant things in packets sent and received, although in a global mmo that people want to have be region unlocked it would be for the best.

Peer to Peer would only help your perception of someone's position in relation to you. The fight itself would still need to be server authoritative, so it'd need all player positions regardless..

Any online game with dynamic assets/actors will require server authority and simulation for engagement.

Also, there's too many issues with Peer to Peer, it's not uncommon for you to just not see other players because your network is too restrictive and blocking those random IPs. Not to mention it's a security risk.

But regardless.. It wouldn't fix the actual issues we're experiencing, it would just introduce completely new issues with no real upside to us or benefit to the server itself. Most servers have a thread layer for network activity. I don't give a shit if players hitch, I only care if I still get hit by an AoE I was out of 4 seconds ago. P2P won't fix that unfortunately. The only benefit I guess I could see is faster visible reaction from other players, so any player interacting mechanics would be easier.