Project Reality Forums

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

It was just for shits and giggles. Cool nontheless.

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?

I 'member having 100 people in our mainbase on Karez organizing to take a photo. Many lags were had.

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.

Those were great times, even the 128 player events were a ton of fun

It's pretty much on the no-fly list after 100p got added.

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 ?

Hell, even 128 players would be awesome. I came here to make this exact post

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.

254 players aren't enough! I'll be disappointed until 255 players ...

-i was wrong here-

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.

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?!?!?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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