MMORPGs moving to 1-10 MS server side polling

[Tiggy]

FFXIV updates at 100 MS intervals in PVP and only in specific instances (coil & certain extreme.)

Everywhere else in the world updates at 300 MS intervals. This information comes directly from what the developers have told us.

Direct from patch 2.2 patch notes.
"Improvements made to the frequency with which player positioning is updated in patch 2.1 will now apply to all instances."

So yes it's not the whole game, but it's in every scenario where content actually would actually require it. Nothing in the open world requires that extra update rate at all. Most complaints stem from problems in dungeons, raids, or trials since that's where progress is actually hindered by lag.

The only time the servers actually have genuine trouble is when too many people congregate in one place. Specifically Odin/Behemoth/A and S rank hunts. That's not even a lag problem. That's the servers crapping themselves since they can't handle the sheer volume of people that showed up. Some games solve this problem with a person per zone limit, and others such as Eve solve it by doing time dilation. Every game is going to suffer when too many people are in once place. Square has surprisingly loose restrictions on people per zone considering how bad it can get at overcrowded S ranks. Thankfully this is one of those things that tends to get better as the game ages. All those tiny performance tweaks really add up over time as well as improved hardware.

Let's say we lived in a world where the servers were as close to ideal perfection as possible. The servers handled even more objects than today with even more concurrent people, and it did so with even less server power than today. I mean why not if this is a fantasy right so let's even say they have a way of certifiably proving the servers could be no better than that so we know without a shadow of a doubt that the servers are simply fantastic. If we were still using the same internet we have right now, even given the super awesomeness of those servers, we would still see most of these threads complaining about lag. People would still be dying and people would still be blaming square.

[Alukah]

The only time the servers actually have genuine trouble is when too many people congregate in one place. Specifically Odin/Behemoth/A and S rank hunts. That's not even a lag problem. That's the servers crapping themselves since they can't handle the sheer volume of people that showed up. Some games solve this problem with a person per zone limit, and others such as Eve solve it by doing time dilation. Every game is going to suffer when too many people are in once place. Square has surprisingly loose restrictions on people per zone considering how bad it can get at overcrowded S ranks. Thankfully this is one of those things that tends to get better as the game ages. All those tiny performance tweaks really add up over time as well as improved hardware.

I don't know if you are familiar with GW2's "overflow" system (before they implemented the mega server system) but in the live letter previous to TGS they talked about implementing a system like that here in order to deal with congestion issues, and perhaps open a path for open world dungeons.

1:30:04
Q: Do you have plans to implement open-world dungeons like there were in 1.0?

A: Kasuga: If Yoshida would like to do this then we'll think about it. However, after patch 2.35 North Shroud has been congested, and there are concerns that the same conditions would occur in other areas as well if we implemented open-world dungeons.

Yoshida: Right now, due to the fact that North Shroud serves as the entrance point for the Second Coil of Bahamut as well as the location of the Ixali base it's extremely crowded. When it comes to field areas, we need to consider congestion when creating content. It wouldn't be impossible to design such a dungeon, but the really difficult part is reward balancing. Also, it would very likely be content you couldn't complete with a small amount of people, and conversely, it would be completed quite easily if more than the necessary amount of people were to attempt it. If we were to implement this, just one wouldn't be enough and we would have to implement multiple dungeons at the same time. This kind of content would turn into a massive raid with even more participants than the Crystal Tower, and, similar to the 80-player raids of first generation MMORPGs, it would be easy to find people when it's implemented, but after a while it would be really tough to get the right amount of people together.

When we started developing FFXIV: ARR, there was the question of whether or not we would make dungeons using open-world areas, but we decided to consider it at a later date since that kind of content wouldn't last two seconds if we implemented it without balanced rewards and participation.

Additionally, the congestion in North Shroud is quite rough, so we're currently looking into whether we should implement a system that has been adopted by other MMORPGs for making multiple instances of the same open-world area. The preparations have already been made and we've implemented this into the Chinese version of the game, so we do have some operative results. We'll be testing things up until the last minute to be sure that the concept of multiple open-world instances is clear for players who aren't used to this kind of system.

[Gextiv]

Come on guys, I can understand the deep affection and love towards SE; after all, they do provide us with the Final Fantasy franchise we all love and adore. But let us not be disillusioned that S.E shares no responsibility, fault , or control over the "lag" that a portion of the player base experiences.

I propose a solution, however! Complimentary VPN service to all players affected by the "lag", since VPNS seem an effective tool to combat the "lag".

@Fornix
In other words, they cut corners at the expense of the player base.


P.S PS3 limitations

[Teryaani]

Come on guys, I can understand the deep affection and love towards SE; after all, they do provide us with the Final Fantasy franchise we all love and adore. But let us not be disillusioned that S.E shares no responsibility, fault , or control over the "lag" that a portion of the player base experiences.

I can only speak for me, and I know I'm not going absolve them of their share in this.

I think your point here:

In other words, they cut corners at the expense of the player base.

Is completely right. The premise of this thread though (server polling rate ist uber alles!) isn't the right answer to the problem.

[Fornix]

@Fornix
In other words, they cut corners at the expense of the player base.

I don't agree on that assessment. The transfer of more and more data centers to the colder climates is a very environmentally sound decision. And I hope that more will follow, if need be through investments done on for example a EU level in case of Europe.

In the past, latency would have been a limiting factor and made such transfers impossible. However, with minimal switches and routing, combined with high bandwidth fiber optic lines connecting to such data centers through the oceans a data center in e.g. iceland is very feasible. The delay to such locations often then also is not caused due to going overseas or by being on a relatively great distance. After all, 10.000 km's, a distance from Canada to Chile, only equates to an expected latency of a mere 100 ms.

The fact that on a smaller distance people are getting higher latency rates than that is not due to the servers being hosted in Canada, it's due to bad routing on the way there. And those issues are going to have to be resolved on an entirely different level. This is not something game publishers are going to be able to fix. Sure some servers may be hosted on a location prior to bad network segments, giving a good connection for you. However, those players at the other end of the route in that case will end up having the same problems.

Ultimately it's the responsibility of those who own the problematic networks to up their game and make the required fixes. Unfortunately more often than not these areas are left to degrade further and further. Some ISP's may take initiative themselves and simply reroute traffic in a different direction. Providing a general better experience for their customers without having to resort to third party services. However, ISP's are limited in what they can do as well. As they tend to own only a segment of national or international networks. Where your data goes once it travels over the network of their neighbour, is no longer up to them. The neighbour can still route you on to a terrible segment.



As for Yoshi's statement regarding the congestion in North Shroud and possible multiple instancing it as a solution:

Additionally, the congestion in North Shroud is quite rough, so we're currently looking into whether we should implement a system that has been adopted by other MMORPGs for making multiple instances of the same open-world area. The preparations have already been made and we've implemented this into the Chinese version of the game, so we do have some operative results. We'll be testing things up until the last minute to be sure that the concept of multiple open-world instances is clear for players who aren't used to this kind of system.

Bear in mind that that's absolutely nothing new. And more often than not the motivation to introduce instancing here is due to the graphical lag created on the player's end more so than anything else. Server side handling isn't so much an issue in this game. Even on S-ranks, where over a 100 players may actively be casting and all there's still no delay in skill casts. EVE like proportions of failure due to a much greater number of players and interactions involved aren't met. Especially not when players are standing idle. However, fps drops are most apparent for many players. A lot of people then also complain about lag in the city hub in north shroud or during S-ranks. But this lag mainly comes down to nothing else than their fps dropping below 10.

[Amberion]

Additionally, the congestion in North Shroud is quite rough, so we're currently looking into whether we should implement a system that has been adopted by other MMORPGs for making multiple instances of the same open-world area. The preparations have already been made and we've implemented this into the Chinese version of the game, so we do have some operative results. We'll be testing things up until the last minute to be sure that the concept of multiple open-world instances is clear for players who aren't used to this kind of system.

Translation: We plan to remove open world completely, and instead make everything instanced.

[Dwill]

Translation: We plan to remove open world completely, and instead make everything instanced.

Swing and a miss.

What this means is that they are trying to create a system where in case that a zone is being overcrowded (North Shroud as an example) and it starts affecting the whole server with performance issues, the server will instead create a second copy of North Shroud to redirect players to said copy so that the server doesn't take a performance hit. Another way this is done is by having the server create multiple copies of the same zones and let player switch between these copies. The former is the more likely option (in my opinion).

Next time, read what you quote and try to understand it.

[Amberion]

Swing and a miss.

What this means is that they are trying to create a system where in case that a zone is being overcrowded (North Shroud as an example) and it starts affecting the whole server with performance issues, the server will instead create a second copy of North Shroud to redirect players to said copy so that the server doesn't take a performance hit. Another way this is done is by having the server create multiple copies of the same zones and let player switch between these copies. The former is the more likely option (in my opinion).

Next time, read what you quote and try to understand it.

That is instancing and not open world. Just because they want to go cheap on hardware doesn't remove that fact.

You have to remember that the only reason instancing in exists in the first place, is to not have to spend as much on server cost. And with how much they proclaim this game to be a huge success, they should not have to go that route.

Or making the game in a way that spreads people around and not clumping them together.

[Dwill]

That is instancing and not open world. Just because they want to go cheap on hardware doesn't remove that fact.

Every zone by definition are already mini-instances dues to having to load between each of them. If it was a real open world, you would log in Gridania for example and you could travel between any Shroud without having to load between each of them. What they are doing is just making sure that there is no performance issue due to overcrowding. If the solution that they choose is similar to the first one I mentioned earlier on, most of you are never going to even notice a difference in your gameplay.

You have to remember that the only reason instancing in exists in the first place, is to not have to spend as much on server cost.

It is true that server cost is a big reason for instancing but is far from the only one. Instancing allows for multiple group to do dungeons and raids at the same time and this is another huge reason why instance exists in the first place.

And with how much they proclaim this game to be a huge success, they should not have to go that route.

Or making the game in a way that spreads people around and not clumping them together.

I agree that Square Enix dropped the ball hard on the server aspect and that they could have had a much better insight on how many people this would attract. Though right now, adding new servers and data centers would be even harder, as it was explained earlier in the thread.

[Amberion]

Every zone by definition are already mini-instances dues to having to load between each of them. If it was a real open world, you would log in Gridania for example and you could travel between any Shroud without having to load between each of them. What they are doing is just making sure that there is no performance issue due to overcrowding. If the solution that they choose is similar to the first one I mentioned earlier on, most of you are never going to even notice a difference in your gameplay.

No, a zone isn't an instance. Instance has since the very beginning in '96 (I think it was created for the first time for MMORPGs then), meant that you made copies of a place/zone/whatever. A single occurrence of it doesn't make it instanced.

It is true that server cost is a big reason for instancing but is far from the only one. Instancing allows for multiple group to do dungeons and raids at the same time and this is another huge reason why instance exists in the first place.

The server cost is actually the only reason it was created. At least from what I remember from when I studied it. BTW, not talking about this game, but from when it was actually first used.

I agree that Square Enix dropped the ball hard on the server aspect and that they could have had a much better insight on how many people this would attract. Though right now, adding new servers and data centers would be even harder, as it was explained earlier in the thread.

Well, at least we agree on something.

EDIT:

When I played SWTOR I had much better MS(and their servers are in the USA). Not to say my ping to FF14 is horrible...it's just not good.

The thing is, some are just better at masking lag. And SE is not good at it.