4 ms·

> There will be no cap on concurrent users. This is one of the hardest problems to solve from a technical point of view, but it’s critical. The biggest online g

> There will be no cap on concurrent users. This is one of the hardest problems to solve from a technical point of view, but it’s critical. The biggest online games still restrict each session to around 100 players. Even though millions might be playing at a given time worldwide, a single server will be capped. Massive concurrency will make metaverse experiences feel very different from the present-day internet. Oh cool, looking forward to them waving a magic wand so that they can handle the O(n^2) interaction of n clients interacting in close proximity. World of WarCraft retail can't even handle a 40v40 fight in Alterac Valley smoothly. EVE Online handles massive space battles by delaying events and having things stop occuring in realtime. What are Blizzard and all other MMO developers missing?

adriand 5y ago
I played Planetside quite a bit when it came out in 2003. It supported FPS battles with hundreds of people participating. If this kind of scale was the most important thing for shooters then the subsequent trend would have been to increase that scale, but that's not what happened. My assumption is that games optimize for fun, and scale isn't necessarily fun. Soccer (football) permits 11 players per side on the field at any one time. Why not make it 25? Why not make it 100?! Wouldn't that be more fun? Presumably not.
randyrand 5y ago
limiting the range / scope of your affects is probably the best answer here. keep a small ‘n’ FPS players only affect a single ballistic trajectory (a bullet) at a time. Characters also need to be rendered, but that’s O(N).
- michaelt 5y ago
  Finally, VR will be able to faithfully simulate being unable to get into a nightclub because it's full.
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  > FPS players only affect a single ballistic trajectory (a bullet) at a time. If only!

adriand 5y ago

I played Planetside quite a bit when it came out in 2003. It supported FPS battles with hundreds of people participating. If this kind of scale was the most important thing for shooters then the subsequent trend would have been to increase that scale, but that's not what happened. My assumption is that games optimize for fun, and scale isn't necessarily fun. Soccer (football) permits 11 players per side on the field at any one time. Why not make it 25? Why not make it 100?! Wouldn't that be more fun? Presumably not.

randyrand 5y ago

limiting the range / scope of your affects is probably the best answer here. keep a small ‘n’ FPS players only affect a single ballistic trajectory (a bullet) at a time. Characters also need to be rendered, but that’s O(N).

michaelt 5y ago
Finally, VR will be able to faithfully simulate being unable to get into a nightclub because it's full.
meheleventyone 5y ago
> FPS players only affect a single ballistic trajectory (a bullet) at a time. If only!