3 ms·
They mean that the game avoids letting the player realize the distinction exists; they go in and out of multiplayer "mode", presumably based on areas or turns o
by setr 9y ago
They mean that the game avoids letting the player realize the distinction exists; they go in and out of multiplayer "mode", presumably based on areas or turns or something, and are none the wiser. All multiplayer/singleplayer scaffolding occurs occur solely in the background
IE the souls series, and its invader system.
[edit] just read the article properly, it looks like they really wanted it for is seamless transition between "p2p bubbles", so you probably enter singleplayer when waiting for the connection, and you've got a wifi-like connectivity problem (but due to virtual land movement).
So its not at all the issue of always-on multiplayer in general mmos; its more like guild wars "instances", and making the grouping automatic and no-felt-loading.
- Rotten194 9y agoSeamless singleplayer / multiplayer is an orthagonal problem to P2P network architectures, though. You can have one without the other.
- elefanten 9y agoWoW started instancing content out in the world several expansions back. As far as I remember and know, people can seamlessly phase in and out of each other's instances. In fact, I think the made it work across realm servers. So, it seems it's proven possible without this hybrid p2p model, which has a sharp performance downside for shooter pvp. I don't understand the decision. Is there something more nuanced experience-wise that their system achieves? Or could it be something else, like an attempt to save on infrastructure costs?
- datasage 9y agoWOW is instanced, but the instances are all hosted by Blizzard. Instances are basically a replication of the world state, and managed automatically depending on load. If you join a group, you will automatically switch to the instance those players are in. In Destiny, some of the instances are hosted directly on the client. Depending where you are and what you are doing.