200 players anywhere ?

General discussion of the Project Reality: BF2 modification.
GhostTouch
Posts: 19
Joined: 2010-12-21 14:30

200 players anywhere ?

Post by GhostTouch »

What ever happened to 200 players in pr ?
That was the best thing for a truly large battlefield !


FFG
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1468
Joined: 2014-03-18 04:47

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by FFG »

200 players has alot of issues.

First major issue being optimisation. on lower end computers, when looking towards even 6 people in the same space you can lose 10-20 fps.

Second major issue is server stability. Servers crash constantly, It would only be worst with 200 players.

Third major issue being managing 200 players. You have situations where servers can barely manage 100 autistic retards. Do you really think it would be a good idea to allow those same trash servers manage 200 people?
PricelineNegotiator
Posts: 1382
Joined: 2009-08-30 04:32

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by PricelineNegotiator »

I 'member having 100 people in our mainbase on Karez organizing to take a photo. Many lags were had.
Image
Wicca
Posts: 7336
Joined: 2008-01-05 14:53

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Wicca »

During 0.9 some really high end servers were stable enough, and admin operations were different back then, with mumble checks and whatnot.

It probably wouldnt work in 1.0 due to the amount of new content added etc.

Still I recall those days where we had the 200 player server with alot of nostalgia and fun times. Really the golden age of PR for me.
Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.
Republic_Commando
Posts: 72
Joined: 2009-06-28 16:39

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Republic_Commando »

Those were great times, even the 128 player events were a ton of fun
X-Alt
Posts: 1073
Joined: 2013-07-02 22:35

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by X-Alt »

It's pretty much on the no-fly list after 100p got added.
GhostTouch
Posts: 19
Joined: 2010-12-21 14:30

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by GhostTouch »

i would love to setup a BF2 vanilla server with 200 players. I haven't researched much but i think i need a hex editor to modify the .exe launcher if im not mistaken ?
djk1518
Posts: 19
Joined: 2015-09-09 22:02

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by djk1518 »

Hell, even 128 players would be awesome. I came here to make this exact post
GhostTouch
Posts: 19
Joined: 2010-12-21 14:30

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by GhostTouch »

I have to say i am really disappointed in project reality right now for not embracing the extend for 254 players witch should not be a problem with the current available hardware, this should of been the project reality's rebirth project and yet 5 years have passed in vain .... sad just sad :( instead for what i'v seen we now get most population in pr from streamers on youtube that bring all the .... you know type of people
and destroy this game :( i'l just have to discontinue playing this and have my fingers crossed for squad since PR devs are inflexible.
ElPube
Posts: 39
Joined: 2006-06-04 17:18

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by ElPube »

254 players aren't enough! I'll be disappointed until 255 players ... :confused:
Image
VTRaptor
Posts: 330
Joined: 2015-06-25 14:49

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by VTRaptor »

-i was wrong here-
Last edited by VTRaptor on 2018-04-01 10:37, edited 1 time in total.
Zeris
Posts: 8
Joined: 2014-06-13 05:37

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Zeris »

While I obviously want Project Reality to continue moving forward with innovation and development, I do not think 200 player servers is a necessary step. Many of the reasons why have been touched on already, but some of you seem to forget that outside of "MMO FPS" games, the Battlefield series has some of the largest servers at 64 players. People got upset when it was announced that Bad Company 2 would not support 64 player servers. Bad Company 2 is also largely heralded as one of the best BF games to be released.

Point being, there's more important things that could be focused on instead of doubling the player count on servers. I'm currently pretty satisfied with the direction PR is going and I don't necessarily think 200 player servers are going to make anything "better" about the game.
FlyingR
Posts: 311
Joined: 2014-08-05 22:42

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by FlyingR »

Zeris wrote:There's more important things that could be focused on instead of doubling the player count on servers.
Like fastropes... you heard me devs?!?!?
Zeris
Posts: 8
Joined: 2014-06-13 05:37

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Zeris »

FlyingR wrote:Like fastropes...
Fast-roping would be awesome, but likely difficult to do. I'm frankly surprised I haven't seen more military shooters utilize fast-roping.
Zeno
Posts: 3430
Joined: 2008-09-07 14:16

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Zeno »

GhostTouch wrote:I have to say i am really disappointed in project reality right now for not embracing the extend for 254 players witch should not be a problem with the current available hardware, this should of been the project reality's rebirth project and yet 5 years have passed in vain .... sad just sad :( instead for what i'v seen we now get most population in pr from streamers on youtube that bring all the .... you know type of people
and destroy this game :( i'l just have to discontinue playing this and have my fingers crossed for squad since PR devs are inflexible.
as cool as that sounds, you simply dont understand how game engines and development works. 254 players are simply not nearly achievable in any kind of playable state, for something like that you would need full access to the source code, and even then it would be impossible to get stable and good gameplay out of it.
Image
[R-DEV]Ninja2dan: Not having a spotter is like masturbating with a cheese grater...mildly amusing at first, but generally painful and bloody in the end.

Thornehaw: If all this have been evidently true, Battlefield is a much scarier and dirtier than ever imagined. Not a conspiracy, but a possibility. If it is true, then trusting another is quite worrisome.
Wicca
Posts: 7336
Joined: 2008-01-05 14:53

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Wicca »

Actually, 254 is the max number, as was tested about 3 years ago by soppa. So you are the one who doesnt know anything about the game engine @zeno :P
Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.
Spook
Posts: 2458
Joined: 2011-07-12 14:08

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Spook »

He said
nearly achievable in any kind of playable state

Just cause the server sucessfully boots with 254 player configuration does not mean its playable. Remember the massive FPS problems, server rubberbanding and client and server crashes running with these numbers? Pepperidge farm remembers.
Image
Wicca
Posts: 7336
Joined: 2008-01-05 14:53

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Wicca »

Well it was regularly seeded, so it was in a playable state. Although the first time he tested it, was on fallujah.

I am anyway not interested in anything larger than 200p due to the inability to create more squads.
Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.
Zeno
Posts: 3430
Joined: 2008-09-07 14:16

Re: 200 players anywhere ?

Post by Zeno »

Wicca wrote:Well it was regularly seeded, so it was in a playable state. Although the first time he tested it, was on fallujah.

I am anyway not interested in anything larger than 200p due to the inability to create more squads.
"playable state", as in stable and actually enjoyable.

the gameplay enjoyment would drop to almost 0 after a couple of rounds when the "ermergerd, this is so cewl"-effect wears off.

- Terrible rubberbanding.
- Stability issues from hell.
- Gameplay is simply not suited for that ammount of people.
- Framerate for low/medium users
Image
[R-DEV]Ninja2dan: Not having a spotter is like masturbating with a cheese grater...mildly amusing at first, but generally painful and bloody in the end.

Thornehaw: If all this have been evidently true, Battlefield is a much scarier and dirtier than ever imagined. Not a conspiracy, but a possibility. If it is true, then trusting another is quite worrisome.
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 General Discussion”